The study, published in the journal Science was led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a US government agency that focuses on the conditions of the oceans and the atmosphere, and researchers from the University of California, Davis.

“What’s exciting about this work is that it shows that everyday consumer choices can have an impact on air quality in the US,” said Christopher Cappa, professor of civil and environmental engineering at UC Davis and a co-author on the paper.

The scientists focused on volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that can waft into the atmosphere and react with other substances to produce either ozone or particulate matter – both of which are have known health impacts, including lung damage.

Tiny particles

People use a lot more fuel than they do petroleum-based compounds in chemical products – about 15 times more by weight, say the scientists.

Even so, lotions, paints and other products contribute about as much to air pollution as does the transportation sector. In the case of one type of pollution – tiny particles that can damage people’s lungs – particle-forming emissions from chemical products are about twice as high as those from the transportation sector, the team found.

Transportation is far from off the hook, but over the past few decades, in response to tighter regulations, car manufacturers have made pollution-limiting changes to engines, fuels and gas pumps.

“As transportation gets cleaner, those other sources become more and more important,” said team leader Brian McDonald, a scientist in the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, working in NOAA’s Chemical Sciences Division.

Personal care products are half the problem

The research team reassessed air pollution sources by sorting through recent chemical production statistics compiled by industries and regulatory agencies, by making detailed atmospheric chemistry measurements in Los Angeles air, and by evaluating indoor air quality measurements made by others.

This led to the conclusion that the amount of VOCs emitted by consumer and industrial products is actually two or three times greater than estimated by current air pollution inventories, which also overestimate vehicular sources.

For example, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that about 75% of VOC emissions (by weight) come from vehicular sources, and about 25% from chemical products. The new study, which included a detailed assessment of up-to-date chemical use statistics and previously unavailable atmospheric data, puts the split closer to 50-50.

The disproportionate air quality impact of chemical product emissions is partly because of a fundamental difference between those products and fuels.

“Gasoline is stored in closed, hopefully airtight, containers and the VOCs in gasoline are burned for energy,” said NOAA atmospheric scientist Jessica Gilman. “But volatile chemical products used in common solvents and personal care products are literally designed to evaporate. You wear perfume or use scented products so that you or your neighbour can enjoy the aroma. You don’t do this with gasoline,” Gilman said.

Closing the gap

Cappa said that there has been a persistent gap between levels of fine particles measured in urban air and predictions from models. The new work has the potential to close this gap, he said.

The team found that they simply could not reproduce the levels of particles or ozone they measured in the Los Angeles area without including emissions from volatile chemical products. They also determined that people are exposed to very high concentrations of these volatile compounds indoors.

• For more on this topic see our articles Air pollution is everyone’s health problem , Petrochemical beauty? No thanks! and A cleaner, greener home – without chemicals!

The analysis comprised data from 1,863 participants who took part in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) and who also enrolled in both MESA’s Sleep and Air Pollution studies.

The researchers looked at two of the most common air pollutants: NO₂ (nitrogen dioxide, a traffic-related pollutant gas) and PM_2.5, (fine-particle pollution).

Taking measurements

The researchers combined data from different sources. Air pollution measurements were gathered from hundreds of MESA Air and Environmental Protection Agency monitoring sites in six US cities. This allowed the team to estimate air pollution exposures at each participant’s home at two time points: one year and five years.

Wrist actigraphy, which measures small movements, provided detailed estimates of sleep and wake patterns over seven consecutive days. This was used to calculate “sleep efficiency”- a measure of the percentage of time in bed spent asleep vs. awake.

The population was divided into four groups according to levels of pollution and sleep efficiency was measured against varying levels of pollution exposure.

Results which were presented ahead of publication at the recent ATS 2017 International Conference found:

• The group with the highest levels of NO₂ over five years had an almost 60% increased likelihood of having low sleep efficiency compared to those with the lowest NO₂
• The group with the highest exposures to small particulates (PM_2.5) had a nearly 50% increased likelihood of having low sleep efficiency.

Chronic effects

This study was particularly looking at in chronic exposure to air pollution and what that long-term exposure might mean for sleep health, but the researchers admit that there may also be acute sleep effects from short-term exposure to high pollution levels as well.

“These new findings indicate the possibility that commonly experienced levels of air pollution not only affect heart and lung disease, but also sleep quality.” said lead author Martha E. Billings, MD, MSc, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Washington.

She said one likely reason for this effect is that air pollution causes upper airway irritation, swelling and congestion, and may also affect the central nervous system and brain areas that control breathing patterns and sleep.

“Improving air quality may be one way to enhance sleep health and perhaps reduce health disparities,” she added.

• We can’t control the quality of outdoor air, though studies show plant power can help, see Plants are the best ‘green technology’ for reducing city pollution
• For ways to improve indoor air quality see our articles House plants – a natural way to improve indoor air quality and A cleaner, greener home – without chemicals!
• See also tips for How to get a good night’s sleep

Most of us assume they just go away ‘somewhere’, but Italian researchers have shown that they persist in our water.

Soaps, detergents, shampoos and many other personal hygiene products contain mixtures of synthetic fragrance molecules that have passed ‘safety’ tests for human health but with little or nothing known about their impact on the environment.

Researchers at the Ca’ Foscari University of Venice and the Institute for the Dynamics of Environmental Processes of the National Research Council (CNR – IDPA) decided to investigate the waterways in and around Venice to look for traces of these molecules which are referred to as ‘perfumes’ or ‘parfume’ in the ingredients of products that we use daily.

The results were published in the scientific journal Science of the Total Environment.

Testing the water

Between April and December 2015, scientists repeatedly collected water samples from 22 places between the inner canals in the historic centre of Venice, the island of Burano and at two points in the far-north lagoon.

They were looking for the presence of 17 fragrance chemical that are among the most used and chemically stable of the thousands available to the cosmetics industry. These were: amberketal, ambrofix, amyl salicylate, benzyl salicylate, bourgeonal, dupical, hexyl salicylate, isobutavan, lemonile, mefranal, myraldene, okoumal, oranger crystals, pelargene, peonile, tridecene-2-nitrile and ultravanil.

Traces of ‘scented’ molecules were found in all the sampling sites, including those more distant from inhabited areas. However, as the researchers note concentrations in inner city canals were up to 500 times higher than in more remote areas. Samples collected during conditions of low tide in Venice and Burano showed concentrations comparable to those of untreated waste water.

In Venice – a city without sewers – wastewater is treated through biological tanks which then flow directly into the canal. This method does little to lower concentrations of these chemicals in the water, giving researchers a real world view of the level of fragrance chemicals that reach the water.

Allergens and more

The researchers say the study gives rise to several questions such as ‘Why do these fragrances persist in the environment?’ and ‘What is their possible impact on our ecosystems?’ – and note that answers to these questions are still not well studied. In fact most studies into fragrance chemicals look at levels in the air and how these can affect human health.

But, the researchers note, salicylates, oestrogenic and allergenic compounds, were in general the most abundant and widespread components found in the waters and one of the most frequently found compounds in the waters of the lagoon was benzyl salicylate, a known allergenic which has to be indicated on the labels of cosmetic products which contain it.

It has been known for some years that pharmaceuticals and chemicals used personal care products and are often filtered ineffectively by most wastewater treatment plants which are not designed to manage them.

The researchers note that the concentrations they found were below the threshold for acute toxicity to marine organisms. But, in fact, this is beside the point since the threshold for acute toxicity does not take into account the ‘small-dose, big-effect’ impact of hormone disrupting chemicals and harm that may be caused by low chronic exposure.

Scientists testing commercial sea salt products in China have found that these products also contain tiny bits of plastic known as microplastics, or microbeads.

These tiny particles of plastic come from a variety of sources, including industrial waste, personal care products and plastic litter that degrades in the environment.

We find them in bodies of water around the world, we know that they are accumulating in our oceans and the creature that live in them. But this new study in the journal Environmental Science & Technology shows for the first time how easily they can get in to the human food chain, and into humans.

The researchers from East China Normal University in Shanghai tested 15 brands of sea salts, lake salts, and rock and well salts from underground deposits purchased at Chinese supermarkets. What they found was:

• Sea salts contained the highest concentrations of microplastics from 550 to 681 particles per kilogram.
• Lake salts had 43 to 364 particles per kilogram
• Rock and well salts had the lowest amounts ranging from 7 to 204 particles per kilogram.

Unexpected contamination

The researchers began with the hypothesis that sea salts, which are evaporated directly from sea water, might contain microplastics.

They hadn’t suspected, however, that rock salt which comes from underground deposits, would have any. It has been suggested that this contamination did not come from the environment, but likely occurred when the salt was mined, milled or packaged

The Chinese team estimate that if adults were to consume sea salt at the recommended nutritional level (6g per day) for the seasoning, they could potentially ingest 1,000 microplastic particles every year from that source alone.

They also note that for comparison Europeans consuming the most shellfish – including mussels, scallops, oysters and clams – also consume around 11,000 of these particles every year. Chinese people consuming the most shellfish might consume considerably more – around 100,000 particles each year.

Health effects

How might these tiny particle affect our health?

Some lab tests have shown nano-sized plastic fragments can enter cells and cause tissue damage. Another possible risk from eating microplastics may not be due to the plastic itself. Plastics act like a sponge for many toxic chemicals such as dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane.

More research is needed to understand the full impact of eating microplastics. While the researchers suggest the amount we may consume is small, this hardly matters given hormone disrupting chemicals that microplastics can contain. With hormone disrupting chemicals the dose does not make the poison and small amounts can have major effects on health.

Besides, would knowing consume plastic?

• To learn more about microplastics see our article Cosmetic microbeads – the tiny toxins polluting our oceans

People who work in well-ventilated offices with below-average levels of indoor pollutants and carbon dioxide (CO₂) think significantly better in crucial areas such as responding to a crisis or developing strategy – than those who work in offices with typical levels, say US researchers.

The findings published in Environmental Health Perspectives suggest that the indoor environments in which many people work daily could be adversely affecting cognitive function – and that, conversely, improved air quality could greatly increase the cognitive function performance of workers.

Sick buildings

Researchers wanted to look at the impact of ventilation, chemicals, and carbon dioxide on workers’ cognitive function because, as buildings have become more energy efficient, they have also become more airtight, increasing the potential for poor indoor environmental quality.

Twice as smart

While the participants performed their normal work, the researchers exposed them to various simulated building conditions: conventional conditions with relatively high concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as those emitted from common materials in offices; green conditions with low VOC concentrations; green conditions with enhanced ventilation (dubbed “green+”); and conditions with artificially elevated levels of CO₂, independent of ventilation. At the end of each day, they conducted cognitive testing on the participants.

The research team from the university of Leicester looked at ways trees could help to reduce air pollution in cities and the study, published in the journal Atmospheric Environment, focused on the city of Leicester, where up to 90% of some atmospheric pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are emitted by traffic.

PhD researcher Antoine Jeanjean from the University of Leicester’s Department of Physics and Astronomy who led the research said his team focused on the city centre of Leicester where there is a high density of buildings and traffic in order to find ways of accurately measuring air pollution in cities.  “Predicting the concentration of air pollutants is essential for monitoring air quality in cities.” he said.

While previous modelling exercises have suggested that trees trap pollution by constricting wind flow in ‘street canyons’ (built up areas with rows of tall buildings), the researchers found this was not always the case.

The researchers found that while trees can decrease the wind speed over the city, thereby trapping pollution in some locations, at the same time they produce more turbulence that helps in dispersing the pollution emitted by traffic, resulting in lower exposure for the public by an average of 7% at pedestrian height.

In addition to the increased dispersion of pollution by trees, there are other well known benefits of urban trees such as reduced stress, noise suppression and chemical and physical removal of certain pollutants.

Plants in towns and cities have been shown to remove nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM), both of which are harmful to human health. Other evidence suggests that in areas where ‘street canyons’ are common green walls can help with the remove up to 30% of airborne pollutants. This suggests that city planners need to pay careful – and more strategic – attention to the ‘green infrastructure’ our our urban areas in order to best protect our health.

Natural Health News — Two air pollutants linked to climate change could also be a major contributor to the unparalleled rise in the number of people sneezing, sniffling and wheezing during allergy season.

The gases, nitrogen dioxide and ground-level ozone, appear to provoke chemical changes in certain airborne allergens that could increase their potency. That, in combination with changes in global climate, could help explain why airborne allergies are becoming more common. The findings were presented at a recent annual National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS).

Nasal allergies are on the rise across the world. Scientists have long suspected that air pollution and climate change are involved in the increasing prevalence of allergies. But understanding the underlying chemical processes behind this phenomenon has proven elusive. The current research provides a starting point, in understanding how chemicals can affect the allergenic potential of airborne  substances.

In previous work the researchers from the Max Planck Institute explored how allergy-causing substances are altered in the air. Building on that work, they decided to dig deeper into how that happens and examine how traffic-related air pollutants could increase the strength of these allergens.

In laboratory tests and computer simulations, the researchers found that ozone (a major component of smog) oxidizes an amino acid that sets off chemical reactions that ultimately alter an allergenic protein’s structure. Meanwhile, nitrogen dioxide (found in car exhausts) appears to alter the separation and binding capabilities of certain allergens.

They believe that together, the two gases make allergens more likely to trigger the body’s immune response, especially in wet, humid and smoggy conditions.

In future research the team hopes to identify other allergenic proteins that are modified in the environment and examine how these affect the human immune system.

• See also Natural remedies to relieve hay fever misery

Canadian and Tanzanian researchers created and distributed a special yoghurt containing Lactobacillus rhamnosus bacteria and observed the outcomes against a control group.

The work, published the journal in mBio, the online open-access journal of the American Society for Microbiology, was focused on how microbes could protect against environmental health damage in poor parts of the world.

Their lab research indicated that L. rhamnosus had a great affinity for binding toxic heavy metals. Working with this knowledge, the team hypothesized that regularly consuming this probiotic strain could prevent metals from being absorbed from the diet.

Working with the Western Heads East organization, Dr. Reid had already established a network of community kitchens in Mwanza, Tanzania to produce a probiotic yoghurt for the local population.

Mwanza is located on the shores of Lake Victoria, which is known to be polluted with pesticides and toxic metals including mercury. The team utilized this network to produce and distribute a new type of yoghurt containing L. rhamnosus. The special yoghurt was distributed to a group of pregnant women and a group of children. The researchers measured the baseline and post-yoghurt levels of toxic metals.

The team found a significant protective effect of the probiotic against mercury and arsenic in the pregnant women. This is important as “reduction in these compounds in the mothers could presumably decrease negative developmental effects in their fetus and newborns,” according to Dr. Reid. While the results obtained in the children studied showed benefits and lower toxin levels, the sample size and duration of treatment did not allow statistical significance.

The researchers were excited by the potential of basic foodstuffs to provide preventative protection for pregnant women worldwide. They are currently investigating lactobacilli with higher and even more specific mechanisms of sequestering mercury.

The findings were presented recently at a joint meeting of the International Society of Endocrinology and the Endocrine Society joint meeting in Chicago.