Cigarette smoke produces 10 times more air pollution than diesel car exhaust
Main Category: Water - Air Quality / AgricultureAlso Included In: Smoking / Quit Smoking
Article Date: 25 Aug 2004 - 0:00 PDT
email to a friend
printer friendly
opinions'Cigarette smoke produces 10 times more air pollution than diesel car exhaust'
| Patient / Public: |  |
|
| Healthcare Prof: |  |
3.21 (14 votes) |
| Article opinions: | 10 posts |
The air pollution emitted by cigarettes is 10 times greater than diesel car exhaust, suggests a controlled experiment, reported in Tobacco Control.
Environmental tobacco smoke produces fine particulate matter, which is the most dangerous element of air pollution for health. Levels indoors can far exceed those outdoors, because new engine models and lead free fuels have cut the levels of particulate matter emissions from car exhausts, say the authors.
The controlled experiment was carried out in a private garage in a small mountain town in northern Italy. The town enjoys very low levels of particulate matter air pollution
A turbo diesel 2 litre engine was started and left idling for 30 minutes in the garage, with the doors closed, after which the doors were left open for four hours. The car was fuelled with low sulphur fuel.
Three filter cigarettes were then lit up sequentially, and left smouldering for a further 30 minutes. The nicotine and tar content of each cigarette was 1 mg and 11.2 mg, respectively.
A portable analyser took readings every two minutes during the experiments.
Combined particulate levels in the first hour after the engine had been started measured 88 ug/m3. Those recorded in the first hour after the cigarettes had been lit measured 830 ug/m3: 10 times greater.
The diesel engine exhaust doubled the particulate matter levels found outdoors at its peak; the environmental tobacco smoke particulate matter reached levels 15 times those measured outdoors.
[Particulate matter from tobacco versus diesel car exhaust: an educational perspective Tobacco Control 2004; 13: 219-21]
Contact:
Dr Giovanni Invernizzi, Tobacco Control Unit, National Cancer Institute,
Milan, Italy
Tel: +39 0343 343 15
Email: ginverni@clavis.it
Click here to view the full paper:
http://press.psprings.co.uk/tc/september/219_tc5975.pdf
For more information please contact:
Emma Dickinson
Tel: +44 (0)20 7383 6529
Fax: +44 (0)20 7383 6403
Email: edickinson@bmj.com.
Public Affairs Division
British Medical Association
BMA House
Tavistock Square
London
WC1H 9JP
After 6.00 pm and weekends:
+44 (0) 1923 350 436
+44 (0)790 167 0068
+44 (0) 208 651 5130
+44 (0) 208 444 7992
+44 (0) 7870 477432
+ 44 (0)115 845 1860
Visit our water - air quality / agriculture section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
24 May. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/12481.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/12481.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
Visitor Opinions (latest shown first)
Middle Ground
posted by Alvin on 7 Mar 2012 at 2:34 pmI am a smoker, i smoke every single day of my life. when i read the title, it interests me, but after reading the experiment, i still smoke. the information provided here IS reliable, for those who comments stuffs like unreliable or BS or this is biased, you are wrong, because you are the ones who are biased. also remember that nicotine isnt the only chemical released to the atmosphere from cigarettes, there are actually around 7000 different chemicals. i know about this and still smokes, cause i dont care, dont care doesnt mean ignorant. this is not an effort to ban tobacco, those who say that are just people who's afraid, this is just a mere fact sheet.
BIASED BS
posted by hahaha on 8 Jan 2012 at 12:01 pmlike the gentlemen said above, your control is nicotine and an idling engine. last time i check nicotine wasn't burning holes in the atmosphere.
Unreliable Rubbish
posted by Dan O'Canain on 20 Oct 2011 at 9:30 pmFirstly, this is an experiment with no control performed under the bias of A tobacco control unit associated with the National Cancer Institute. Many of the results can not be substantiated scientifically in the slightest; the measurement of arbitrary particulate matter, the fact that any remnants after a four hour period were assumed into the tobacco side of the equation and diesel is known to have a finer particulate matter. Not to mention the fact that an idling engine doesn't present any real data nor does 3 cigarettes unrealistically 'smouldering' for 30 minutes. Biased garbage.
Total Bull - cigarettes produce more pollution than diesel care fumes?
posted by Mike on 20 Oct 2011 at 4:05 pmNo way in hell does cigarette smoke even come close to the pollution a combustion engine produces. These studies are created, and controlled, for the exact purpose of banning cigarette smoking wherever and whenever these groups want.
Another argument, which is more costly to the healthcare system, obese people or smokers?
Lots of lies out there people, no one cares to find the truth anymore about anything. They only create skewed studies to support their agenda. Total bullshit.
Guys....Give us a break!
posted by Kazan on 23 Sep 2011 at 1:19 amYou are not reading this precisely, it is not saying that cigarette smoke in a garage would kill you, it is saying that the concentration of the pollutants that stay in the air, are 10 times more...u don't care about what the machines say, because you just want to justify your bad habit...bad move...better do something about yourselves...cleaning the world starts by individuals...commit urself..and don't wait for others to decide what's right for you.
diesel and petrol (gas, benzene)
posted by Dago on 30 Aug 2011 at 10:36 amWell may be in your country Benzine (petrol), but in most part of asia diesel is lot more cheaper than petrol. So we have more diesel vehicles than Benzine.
Who drives a diesel car?
posted by Kalan on 27 May 2011 at 5:16 amWell, some do, but most don't. I've worked in enclosed whorehouses where diesel forklifts were run all day long and there were no issues. it won't kill you.
Anyway, why do the study with a diesel car when most cars are Benzine users?
Stupid study!
Automotive
posted by Jimmy on 0 Jan 1248 at 201008091, 2.0l diesel car with low sulphor fuel. VS 3 cigarettes brings inaccurate results.
1 2.0l diesel car running low sulphor fuel has the same levels as one cigarette with low chemical base.
Making this gentleman's work have incorrect results
1
human test subjects.
posted by bryan on 19 Jul 2010 at 4:17 pmThe instruments can say what they want! If you place a person in a sealed 10 by 10 room for an hour with a running engine gas or diesel - the result after an hour would be death. Now place a person in a room with a cigarette burning for an hour the result would be a human with a slight breathing problem. Having a hard time agreeing with the instruments an how deadly the engine is compared to the cigarette.
Not An Accurate Experiment
posted by Anonymous on 4 Mar 2007 at 9:06 amHow can three cigarettes be more powerful than two cars? If 15% of the US smokes, then what is the percentage of drivers? There are more cars on the road than smokers walking around. Isn't global warming what we should really be worried about?
All this passion and determination should be directed to finding a solution to cars and global warming, not prosecuting smokers who might need your support rather than your critisims in order to quit. I am a smoker and I do want to quit, I don't like inflicting my smoke on others, but I also don't want to be suffocating or burning to death slowly because we have no ozone layer left! I can quit smoking and save myself; however, the damage that the Earth receives is not so easy to heal.
Just a consideration for you from a smoker - I'm not trying to stop the efforts of banning tobacco, but we really need to pay more attention to global warming.
Add Your Opinion On This Article
'Cigarette smoke produces 10 times more air pollution than diesel car exhaust'Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.
Privacy Policy |
Terms and Conditions
MediLexicon International Ltd
Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom
MediLexicon International Ltd © 2004-2012 All rights reserved.
MNT (logo) is the registered EU trade mark of MediLexicon Int. Limited.
Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom
MediLexicon International Ltd © 2004-2012 All rights reserved.
MNT (logo) is the registered EU trade mark of MediLexicon Int. Limited.
