Climate Change

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

So the fact the child had asthma was absolutely in no way contributing?

 

I was agreeing with you.

[Guided Missile]

I know climate is what you expect and weather is what you get, but, really. Only a week ago it was forecast that we were going to be basking in sun, hotter than LA. It has got to make you wonder why trillions will be thrown away, to prevent the predicted long term climate change and getting a five day forecast right is such a struggle.

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, Guided Missile said:

........getting a five day forecast right is such a struggle.

The BBC website often can't get the next 24 hours right.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

The BBC website often can't get the next 24 hours right.

The BBC uses MeteoGroup for their weather forecasts. The Met Office forecast is usually significantly different.

[sadoldgit]

I’m enjoying seeing some of the same people who used to pile on to MLG for his pedantry pick me up on the use of the/a. He would be impressed.

The main point is that the words “air pollution” were used for the first time on a UK death certificate. Let’s not try and water down the significance of that.

The exact words from the coroner were, “Ella died of asthma contributed to by exposure to excessive air pollution.”  If the air pollution wasn’t a major factor, why mention it? No one is going to die by breathing polluted air alone. It causes all sorts of respiratory and cardio vascular problems, especially in children.

Sadiq Khan says that air pollution is responsible for the deaths of 4,000 people in London a year. The Daily Mail says that it is responsible for 40,000 deaths in the UK annually. The Lancet puts the annual death toll due to air pollution at 6.5 million. 

Whinge about ULEZ all you like,  but poor air quality is causing illness and killing people prematurely on a daily basis.
 

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

[egg]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

I’m enjoying seeing some of the same people who used to pile on to MLG for his pedantry pick me up on the use of the/a. He would be impressed.

The main point is that the words “air pollution” were used for the first time on a UK death certificate. Let’s not try and water down the significance of that.

The exact words from the coroner were, “Ella died of asthma contributed to by exposure to excessive air pollution.”  If the air pollution wasn’t a major factor, why mention it? No one is going to die by breathing polluted air alone. It causes all sorts of respiratory and cardio vascular problems, especially in children.

Sadiq Khan says that air pollution is responsible for the deaths of 4,000 people in London a year. The Daily Mail says that it is responsible for 40,000 deaths in the UK annually. The Lancet puts the annual death toll due to air pollution at 6.5 million. 

Whinge about ULEZ all you like,  but poor air quality is causing illness and killing people prematurely on a daily basis.
 

 

There's no pedantry SoG. You exaggerated the facts. The child sadly died of asthma. The air was "a" contributing factor on her death, not "the" reason that she died. 

Misrepresenting the facts to support your argument that this additional road tax is ok is pretty distasteful to be honest. You got it wrong, just accept it and stop digging, please. 

[aintforever]

36 minutes ago, egg said:

There's no pedantry SoG. You exaggerated the facts. The child sadly died of asthma. The air was "a" contributing factor on her death, not "the" reason that she died. 

Misrepresenting the facts to support your argument that this additional road tax is ok is pretty distasteful to be honest. You got it wrong, just accept it and stop digging, please. 

To be fair air pollution was listed as a cause of death by the coroner. Obviously it was an asthma attack that killed her but it sounds like  the air quality triggered it.

Millions of people have asthma in the UK, surely it makes sense to try and reduce the amount of deaths.

[hypochondriac]

15 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

The BBC website often can't get the next 24 hours right.

The other day it said 0% chance of rain. It started raining ten minutes later... 

[egg]

9 hours ago, aintforever said:

To be fair air pollution was listed as a cause of death by the coroner. Obviously it was an asthma attack that killed her but it sounds like  the air quality triggered it.

Millions of people have asthma in the UK, surely it makes sense to try and reduce the amount of deaths.

I wouldn't go quite as far as saying that all asthma deaths are avoidable, but the vast majority are. That only happens though if the asthma sufferer controls his/her asthma.

Sure, lots of things including air can be trigger of asthma symptoms, the triggers only becomes a problem if the asthma is not controlled. 

Cleaning the air won't stop asthma deaths if asthma sufferers don't help themselves and control their asthma. Conversely, if the air stays as it is, and asthma sufferers control their asthma, we'll see a hell of a lot less deaths. 

There's plenty of research and articles out there on asthma and deaths. It's far too simplistic to say clean the air a bit. 

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

I wouldn't go quite as far as saying that all asthma deaths are avoidable, but the vast majority are. That only happens though if the asthma sufferer controls his/her asthma.

Sure, lots of things including air can be trigger of asthma symptoms, the triggers only becomes a problem if the asthma is not controlled. 

Cleaning the air won't stop asthma deaths if asthma sufferers don't help themselves and control their asthma. Conversely, if the air stays as it is, and asthma sufferers control their asthma, we'll see a hell of a lot less deaths. 

There's plenty of research and articles out there on asthma and deaths. It's far too simplistic to say clean the air a bit. 

It's also in the interest of certain people to politicise this death and to mention something about air quality in order to push through their agenda even if it's just one factor of many and even if the death would not have occurred had it been controlled like you say. Very difficult to argue with someone pushing through their agenda of their argument is stopping the kids from dying even if that's a gross distortion of the truth. 

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

It's also in the interest of certain people to politicise this death and to mention something about air quality in order to push through their agenda even if it's just one factor of many and even if the death would not have occurred had it been controlled like you say. Very difficult to argue with someone pushing through their agenda of their argument is stopping the kids from dying even if that's a gross distortion of the truth. 

Indeed. In the case of the young girl who sadly died, it's important to note that the coroner merely said that the air "contributed" to her death. SoG has exaggerated it to being a "major factor" and "the" cause of her death. Distorting the facts around a kids death in a vain attempt to be proved right on a forum is pretty low imo. 

[ecuk268]

3 hours ago, egg said:

Indeed. In the case of the young girl who sadly died, it's important to note that the coroner merely said that the air "contributed" to her death. SoG has exaggerated it to being a "major factor" and "the" cause of her death. Distorting the facts around a kids death in a vain attempt to be proved right on a forum is pretty low imo. 

This is from the coroner's report:

 

[egg]

2 minutes ago, ecuk268 said:

This is from the coroner's report:

 

Thanks. The lack of medical information given to her mother is unforgivable though, and it seems that medical negligence was a huge factor in the child's sad death. However you cut it though, even with the air being as it was, her death was avoidable. 

 

[buctootim]

3 hours ago, egg said:

Indeed. In the case of the young girl who sadly died, it's important to note that the coroner merely said that the air "contributed" to her death. SoG has exaggerated it to being a "major factor" and "the" cause of her death. Distorting the facts around a kids death in a vain attempt to be proved right on a forum is pretty low imo. 

It’s rare that anyone can say atmospheric pollution was the primary cause of an individual death. What is clear  is that the higher the levels of pollution then the higher the premature mortality rates in any given population. In Britain that is thousands of people dying every year for avoidable reasons 

[buctootim]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Thanks. The lack of medical information given to her mother is unforgivable though, and it seems that medical negligence was a huge factor in the child's sad death. However you cut it though, even with the air being as it was, her death was avoidable. 

 

I very highly doubt that she wasn’t given that information. The girl had many many emergency admissions for a chronic condition. It’s impossible that at every intervention for a life threatening condition no one abided by standard procedure. It’s more likely the mother didn’t have the skills or money to implement the changes needed  

[egg]

1 minute ago, buctootim said:

It’s rare that anyone can say atmospheric pollution was the primary cause of an individual death. What is clear  is that the higher the levels of pollution then the higher the premature mortality rates in any given population. In Britain that is thousands of people dying every year for avoidable reasons 

Yep, but you can avoid the vast majority of those deaths even with the air as it is. Regardless, charging diesel vans to drive around London won't in itself do anything to improve air quality.

I'd like to see some of the ULEZ revenues invested in educating people to seek medical help if they think their breathing is effected by the air or anything, and then to use any medication issued correctly. Self help is everyone's responsibility. We also need to train medics to better identify the need for preventative treatment, and to follow it up. As I've said, these deaths are mostly avoidable. 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, buctootim said:

I very highly doubt that she wasn’t given that information. The girl had many many emergency admissions for a chronic condition. It’s impossible that at every intervention for a life threatening condition no one abided by standard procedure. It’s more likely the mother didn’t have the skills or money to implement the changes needed  

According to the coroners report she wasn't given the information. Either way, her death could have been avoided. 

[aintforever]

2 hours ago, egg said:

Either way, her death could have been avoided. 

Yep, better air quality would have helped.

[sadoldgit]

7 hours ago, egg said:

Indeed. In the case of the young girl who sadly died, it's important to note that the coroner merely said that the air "contributed" to her death. SoG has exaggerated it to being a "major factor" and "the" cause of her death. Distorting the facts around a kids death in a vain attempt to be proved right on a forum is pretty low imo. 

What is low is ignoring the bigger issues and just focussing on small ones to further your own agenda. When I first mentioned that she had “air pollution” as cause of death on her certificate that was all that I had heard - that she was the first person to have that as cause of death on her certificate. I didn’t pick up the rest until later.

As I said before, the main issue here is that air pollution is killing people and that anything that is done to improve air and saves lives has to be a good thing.

If you and your buddies disagree, so be it. But please stop with the stupid nitpicking and focus on what the main issue is here.

Thank you.

By the way , The words “material contribution” would indicate something important and therefore “major”. If not why go to the effort of adding it to the report if it was significant. In fact I have just gone back and read everything I have posted on this subject and you have managed to distort everything. Ella’s mother is making a big deal of this on her media rounds. Is that low?

 

Edited 19 August, 2023 by sadoldgit

[egg]

51 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

What is low is ignoring the bigger issues and just focussing on small ones to further your own agenda. When I first mentioned that she had “air pollution” as cause of death on her certificate that was all that I had heard - that she was the first person to have that as cause of death on her certificate. I didn’t pick up the rest until later.

As I said before, the main issue here is that air pollution is killing people and that anything that is done to improve air and saves lives has to be a good thing.

If you and your buddies disagree, so be it. But please stop with the stupid nitpicking and focus on what the main issue is here.

Thank you.

By the way , The words “material contribution” would indicate something important and therefore “major”. If not why go to the effort of adding it to the report if it was significant. In fact I have just gone back and read everything I have posted on this subject and you have managed to distort everything. Ella’s mother is making a big deal of this on her media rounds. Is that low?

 

Absolute bollox have I distorted anything! I've referred to actual facts. It's you who has misrepresented what was actually been said by the coroner in a bid to be seen as correct on a forum. 

I have no agenda. I'm asthmatic and have been hospitalised as a consequence. It's taken me to high dependency CCU - not a fun place to be. I'd love cleaner air, but ultimately it's my responsibility to look after my health, and I do. 

What I take from the coroner's verdict (over the need to improve air quality) is that Ella's death "might have (been) prevented" had her mother been given certain information from medical professionals. It seems to me that an easy fix is to give better training to medics to give the correct info and medication. That would be more effective than charging someone £12.50 to drive a van into London. 

Anyways, I've made my point and CBA to carry on an exchange with you. 

[aintforever]

10 minutes ago, egg said:

It seems to me that an easy fix is to give better training to medics to give the correct info and medication. That would be more effective than charging someone £12.50 to drive a van into London. 

It’s not either-or, we can have better training to medics, give the correct info and medication, and try and make the air cleaner.

[egg]

6 minutes ago, aintforever said:

It’s not either-or, we can have better training to medics, give the correct info and medication, and try and make the air cleaner.

Yes, but we can't make the air cleaner in a short time scale, and we won't do so by charging van drivers to go about their business. Better education and training can, and should be, be delivered quickly. 

[ecuk268]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Yes, but we can't make the air cleaner in a short time scale, and we won't do so by charging van drivers to go about their business. Better education and training can, and should be, be delivered quickly. 

ULEZ has already reduced NOx emissions in central London by 35% in 10 months.

Birmingham recorded a drop of 20% in a year Bath recorded a drop of 14%.

If charging £12.50 reduces the number of dirty vehicles driving into London it'll reduce the one of the causes of avoidable deaths.

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Yes, but we can't make the air cleaner in a short time scale, and we won't do so by charging van drivers to go about their business. Better education and training can, and should be, be delivered quickly. 

Except it has already improved air quality quickly.

Sarah Woolnough, CEO at Asthma + Lung UK, said:

“The devastating impact that air pollution can have on our lungs and lives should not be underestimated. Toxic air stunts children’s’ lung growth, causes lung conditions and can trigger existing ones – that’s why schemes like the ULEZ that meaningfully reduce air pollution are so needed. The ULEZ expansion across inner London shows that where there is political leadership, things can get better and millions of people can breathe cleaner air. More schemes to tackle dirty air are desperately needed across the country, and more needs to be done to implement them where needed. It is vital that these measures are properly supported with improvements to public transport and schemes to help people transition to cleaner modes of transport.”

[Scally42]

Just to put it into perspective and definatley something we should be helping to change

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health

[Weston Super Saint]

Why haven't there been more deaths that record air quality as the cause / contributing factor since this first case in 2013?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/ukdeathsrelatingtoexposuretopollutionorpoorairquality

Seems odd that millions of children are dying due to poor air quality, but no one seems in the least bit bothered to record this.

[Tamesaint]

45 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Why haven't there been more deaths that record air quality as the cause / contributing factor since this first case in 2013?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/ukdeathsrelatingtoexposuretopollutionorpoorairquality

Seems odd that millions of children are dying due to poor air quality, but no one seems in the least bit bothered to record this.

Well that's all right then. Clearly polluted air is good for you and has no bearing at all on health.

[Weston Super Saint]

27 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Well that's all right then. Clearly polluted air is good for you and has no bearing at all on health.

Not the question I was asking though was it....

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Why haven't there been more deaths that record air quality as the cause / contributing factor since this first case in 2013?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/ukdeathsrelatingtoexposuretopollutionorpoorairquality

Seems odd that millions of children are dying due to poor air quality, but no one seems in the least bit bothered to record this.

Also a bit odd that you can continue to contribute to millions of children dying,  provided you cough up £12.50 a day. 

[Tamesaint]

5 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not the question I was asking though was it....

It was a question ? Normally in the written English language a question is denoted by a question mark .ie ?

I thought that you were making another of your smart Alec sarcastic statements this time  casting doubt upon the effects of air pollution. . Clearly , from the lack of response of others on this forum, nobody else realised that it was a question. 

[Turkish]

4 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Also a bit odd that you can continue to contribute to millions of children dying,  provided you cough up £12.50 a day. 

A well person is a lost customer 

[Weston Super Saint]

50 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

It was a question ? Normally in the written English language a question is denoted by a question mark .ie ?

I thought that you were making another of your smart Alec sarcastic statements this time  casting doubt upon the effects of air pollution. . Clearly , from the lack of response of others on this forum, nobody else realised that it was a question. 

Fuck me you're stupid.

Read the first paragraph again paying particular attention to the last character, you even quoted it but seem to have missed the question mark.

And you've got the cheek to call others stupid....

[hypochondriac]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/08/19/khan-tried-silence-scientists-questioned-ulez-claims/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1692476209-1

Interesting. Imperial College study says the ulez has little impact on pollution. So it's not really saving children's lives after all and is in fact a money making scheme. 

[Fan The Flames]

There was always a revenue element to it, as Grant Shapps asked Khan to look at congestion, lez and ulez schemes as part of the funding regime. I don't think it's been hidden.

A ulez scheme is fairer than the tories preferred congestion charge.

Isn't it logic that reducing the amount of the higest polluting cars will be better for the local environment.

 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

There was always a revenue element to it, as Grant Shapps asked Khan to look at congestion, lez and ulez schemes as part of the funding regime. I don't think it's been hidden.

A ulez scheme is fairer than the tories preferred congestion charge.

Isn't it logic that reducing the amount of the higest polluting cars will be better for the local environment.

 

It's a tax on some of the hardest hit in society who can't afford alternative transport. 

[ecuk268]

31 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It's a tax on some of the hardest hit in society who can't afford alternative transport. 

You can get £2000 from the scrappage scheme which will easily buy you a Ulez compliant car.

[aintforever]

37 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It's a tax on some of the hardest hit in society who can't afford alternative transport. 

...thought up by Boris Johnson.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

...thought up by Boris Johnson.

I don't care who thought it up. It shouldn't exist. 

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, ecuk268 said:

You can get £2000 from the scrappage scheme which will easily buy you a Ulez compliant car.

Not if you live outside of London you can't. 

[Weston Super Saint]

18 minutes ago, ecuk268 said:

You can get £2000 from the scrappage scheme which will easily buy you a Ulez compliant car.

I'm not convinced £2k can do that...

Edit : or at least a "reliable" working car!

Edited 21 August, 2023 by Weston Super Saint

[Scally42]

This will open up a can of worms

 

 

[badgerx16]

Warrior- FYI, the above is the authentic sight and sound of "Gammon".

[Lighthouse]

50 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I'm not convinced £2k can do that...

Edit : or at least a "reliable" working car!

Me neither. £2,000 on a Ulez compliant car sounds like a Top Gear challenge, where they all go out and buy a Daihatsu, a Lada and a Daewoo, all with 150k on the clock, and hilarity ensues. My first car was a second hand Daewoo Kalos and it cost more than double that.

[badgerx16]

In theory almost all cars registered since September 2011 are ULEZ compliant, or at least they were when built. How well they have been maintained is another issue.......

[Lighthouse]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In theory almost all cars registered since September 2011 are ULEZ compliant, or at least they were when built. How well they have been maintained is another issue.......

Petrol only, Diesel have to be 2016 or later.

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Diesel have to be 2016 or later.

I know that is what the blurb states, but many EU5 diesels show as compliant on the TfL compliance checker.

[ecuk268]

3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Not if you live outside of London you can't. 

Have a look on Autotrader.

Plenty of decent cars on there for £2000. Some have only done 60 or 70 thousand miles.

[buctootim]

2 hours ago, Scally42 said:

This will open up a can of worms

 

 

He's hilairious! good spot! 

[Scally42]

This is a great watch for anybody who wants a view on climate change that you won't get from the mainstream media