Ballester Ferran, Medina Sylvia, Boldo Elena, Goodman Pat, Neuberger Manfred, Iñiguez Carmen, Künzli Nino
Valencian School of Health Studies (EVES), Valencia, Spain.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008 Feb;62(2):98-105. doi: 10.1136/jech.2007.059857.
Recently new European policies on ambient air quality--namely, the adoption of new standards for fine particulate matter (PM(2.5)), have generated a broad debate about choosing the air quality standards that can best protect public health. The Apheis network estimated the number of potential premature deaths from all causes that could be prevented by reducing PM(2.5) annual levels to 25 microg/m3, 20 microg/m3, 15 microg/m3 and 10 microg/m3 in 26 European cities. The various PM(2.5) concentrations were chosen as different reductions based on the limit values proposed by the new European Directive, the European Parliament, the US Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organization, respectively. The Apheis network provided the health and exposure data used in this study. The concentration-response function (CRF) was derived from the paper by Pope et al (2002). If no direct PM(2.5 )measurements were available, then the PM(10) measurements were converted to PM(2.5 )using a local or an assumed European conversion factor. We performed a sensitivity analysis using assumptions for two key factors--namely, CRF and the conversion factor for PM(2.5). Specifically, using the "at least" approach, in the 26 Apheis cities with more than 40 million inhabitants, reducing annual mean levels of PM(2.5) to 15 microg/m3 could lead to a reduction in the total burden of mortality among people aged 30 years and over that would be four times greater than the reduction in mortality that could be achieved by reducing PM(2.5) levels to 25 microg/m3 (1.6% vs 0.4% reduction) and two times greater than a reduction to 20 microg/m3. The percentage reduction could grow by more than seven times if PM(2.5) levels were reduced to 10 microg/m3 (3.0% vs 0.4%). This study shows that more stringent standards need to be adopted in Europe to protect public health, as proposed by the scientific community and the World Health Organization.
最近,欧洲出台了关于环境空气质量的新政策——即采用了细颗粒物(PM2.5)的新标准,这引发了一场关于选择最能保护公众健康的空气质量标准的广泛辩论。阿菲斯网络估计了在26个欧洲城市将PM2.5年平均浓度降至25微克/立方米、20微克/立方米、15微克/立方米和10微克/立方米可预防的各种原因导致的潜在过早死亡人数。分别根据欧洲新指令、欧洲议会、美国环境保护局和世界卫生组织提议的限值,选择了不同的PM2.5浓度作为不同程度的降低目标。阿菲斯网络提供了本研究中使用的健康和暴露数据。浓度-反应函数(CRF)源自波普等人(2002年)的论文。如果没有直接的PM2.5测量数据,则使用当地或假定的欧洲换算系数将PM10测量值换算为PM2.5。我们对两个关键因素——即CRF和PM2.5的换算系数——的假设进行了敏感性分析。具体而言,采用“至少”方法,在26个阿菲斯城市中,居民超过4000万,将PM2.5年平均浓度降至15微克/立方米可使30岁及以上人群的总死亡负担降低幅度比将PM2.5浓度降至25微克/立方米时(降低1.6%对0.4%)大四倍,比降至20微克/立方米时大两倍。如果将PM2.5浓度降至10微克/立方米,降低百分比可能增长超过七倍(3.0%对0.4%)。本研究表明,欧洲需要如科学界和世界卫生组织所提议的那样,采用更严格的标准来保护公众健康。