Polluted air can reduce human lifespan more than smoking, new data shows

By Sissi De Flaviis, CTVNews.ca Writer

Click here for updates on this story

    Toronto, Ontario (CTV Network) — Breathing in polluted air is so harmful, it can actually have a greater impact on humans lifespan than smoking, according to just-released data.

The latest report by Air Quality Life Index (AQLI), published on Aug. 29, analysed how fine particulate matter (PM2.5) lingering in the air, such as smoke and dust, has a profound impact on human life expectancy and health when there’s consistent exposure.

The report, which used 2021 data, stated particulate pollution can reduce the global average life expectancy by 2.3 years.

That’s slightly higher than tobacco use, which reduces global life expectancy by 2.2 years.

For comparison, child and maternal malnutrition reduces life expectancy by 1.6 years, alcohol use by 7.2 months, similar to unsafe water, sanitation and handwashing. HIV and AIDS is 3.6 months; and nutritional deficiencies just 1.2 months, according to the report.

The report refers to this polluted air as PM2.5 as the matter size is two and a half microns or smaller.

“This is a size that’s small enough to not just get through your body’s defenses and into your lungs, but even into your circulatory system,” said Christa Hasenkopf, co-author of the report and director of air quality programs at the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago.

Breathing PM for long periods can cause lung diseases, respiratory issues, and also affect the cardiovascular system and lead to strokes or heart attacks, Hasenkopf told CTVNews.ca on Wednesday.

Although air pollution affects everyone, it is more impactful on sensitive groups, including the elderly, children or people who are pregnant, she said.

Beyond a population demographic, Hasenkopf also mentioned how health impacts from air pollution are not spread evenly across the world, nor it’s the financial assistance each continent receives.

AIR QUALITY: WORST AND BEST PLACES IN CANADA

It is important to note the report’s data is based on 2021 information. Back then, for the most part, Canada had quite clean air.

“It’s cleaner than the U.S. on average,” she said.

Hasenkopf explained Canadians could add up to 3.5 months to the average life expectancy if air pollution levels were brought down to the World Health Organization’s PM2.5 guidelines.

The WHO guidelines state that annual average concentrations of PM2.5 should not exceed 5 micrograms per square metre, while 24-hour average exposures should not exceed 15 micrograms per square metre more than three to four days per year.

However, this year, due an unprecedented wildfire season, Canada’s air quality will probably not rank as high as it did in the latest report, especially areas of British Columbia.

“If wildfires persist from year to year, that can bump up that annual average pretty easily,” she said.

Hasenkopf said it’s important to keep an eye on upcoming years to see if extreme wildfires become a regular occurrence in the country as these will impact life expectancy in a negative way.

AIR QUALITY: WORST AND BEST PLACES GLOBALLY

According to the report, air pollution affects Asia and Africa far more than other continents.

The places with the worst air quality in the world are India, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria and Indonesia, stated the report.

These countries combined account for three-quarters, or 75 per cent, of the global air pollution burden due to their high pollution levels and large populations, read the report.

“People in these countries are losing about five years off their lives on average,” said co-author Hasenkopf.

In Bangladesh, the country with the highest pollution levels in 2021, a citizen stands to lose an average 6.8 years of life.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., the average citizen loses just 3.6 months.

In Latin America, sixty of the most polluted regions are in Guatemala, Bolivia, and Peru. Residents in these regions breathe similar air to other major pollution hotspots such as Pune, India and Harbin, China.

On the contrary, the places with the best air quality are many Pacific islands, Scandinavia, Iceland and Canada – outside areas affected by wildfires.

WHY DOES IT AFFECT SOME COUNTRIES MORE THAN OTHERS?

Hasenkopf said some factors disproportionately affecting South Asia include industrialization, agricultural burning, infrastructure gaps and a lack of policies to curb pollution levels.

Another challenge is lack of vital statistics.

So far, 60 pollution epidemiological studies have been completed in Europe, the U.S. or Canada; but, in Asia only eight studies have been done outside of China.

Usually, these statistics are a basic building block to create policies and incite community engagement, explained Hasenkopf.

The report shared that only 35.6 percent of Asian countries and 4.9 per cent of countries in Africa have set a national air quality standard. Compared to 83.4 per cent of nations in Europe and North America.

Countries are also underfunded.

The Clean Air Fund, a U.K.-based climate non-profit, estimated that US$63.8 million were deployed worldwide in 2021 by philanthropic foundations to combat outdoor air pollution. Yet, not everyone received an equal amount.

The entire continent of Africa receives under US$300,000. While Asia got US$1.4 million. Europe, the U.S. and Canada received US$34 million, despite having cleaner air.

“I think that’s indicative of air pollution as an issue really flying under the radar,” said Hasenkopf.

SUCCESSFULLY REDUCING AIR POLLUTION

While some countries in South Asia have increased air pollution by 50 per cent in the past two decades, reducing pollution levels is possible.

China, for example, is a “huge success story,” said Hasenkopf.

The country declared war on air pollution in 2014 and has since reduced PM levels by about 42 per cent by implementing strict public policies, she said.

“Is quite outstanding in that short period of time,” she said.

Some of the policies included restricting the number of cars on the road, reducing the manufacturing capacity of iron and steel, and new coal plants were banned. Additionally, homes in the north replaced coal-fired boilers with gas or electric heaters.

Please note: This content carries a strict local market embargo. If you share the same market as the contributor of this article, you may not use it on any platform.