New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Research Indicates Health Effects of Air Pollution Are Underestimated

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Air pollution may be a bigger health threat than previously believed, a 20-year study of residents of Los Angeles indicates. Researchers report that the contribution of particulate matter to chronic health problems may be as much as two to three times greater than current estimates.

Michael Jerrett of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles and his colleagues analyzed two decades of data collected from nearly 23,000 residents of 260 Los Angeles neighborhoods. They found that as the number of fine particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter increased, so, too, did the risk of dying: each jump of 10 micrograms per cubic meter corresponded to a 11 to 17 percent increase in the risk of dying from any cause. "By looking at the effects of pollution within communities, not only did we observe pollution's influence on overall mortality, but we saw specific links between particulate matter and death from ischemic heart disease, such as heart attack, as well as lung cancers," Jerrett says. The team's findings are published in the November issue of the journal Epidemiology.

In the same issue, a second group of researchers from the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California reports that living close to the freeway raises a child's risk of developing asthma. Tracking the respiratory health of 208 children in 10 cities, the scientists determined that those youngsters who lived closer to highways were more likely to develop asthma. Remarks lead study author W. James Gauderman of Keck: "Considering the enormous costs associated with childhood asthma, today's public policy toward regulating pollutants may merit some reevaluation."

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe