Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

richmondres t1_j49qyej wrote

Reply to comment by Creative_soja in Sociodemographic factors such as mortality rate and aging can significantly influence the future health burden related to air pollution. by AlejoRamirezO

Sorry, full article is behaving a paywall, and I can’t tell from just the abstract and blurry figures: are the authors saying that decreasing PM2.5 exposures increases the size of vulnerable populations because folks who would die in high exposure models live longer, and then die, under low exposure models? Or is there some other mechanism that links larger vulnerable populations to increased survivorship relative to high PM2.5 scenarios?

1

AlejoRamirezO OP t1_j4bsyoc wrote

As I understand it, the researchers say that the increase in vulnerable populations is simply due to population growth and the increase in average life. And that associated deaths don´t decrease with less air pollution, but rather increase with demographic distribution and other mechanisms. If you want the full article write me a message with your email.

2

richmondres t1_j4e0x08 wrote

Thank you. I was able to locate an open access link that the authors shared. It seems like they are contrasting potential developmental trajectories, which are also associated with different patterns of PM2.5 emissions. The scenario associated with the highest level of emissions assumes rapid economic growth and improvements in healthcare (as does the two scenarios with the lowest levels of emissions). In those scenarios, they anticipate population aging and lower baseline mortality, and so cause of death patterns shift to those reflect age-related vulnerabilities.

2