|
||||||||||||||
THE MAYOR MUST COME CLEAN WITH LONDONERS … The video commentator Brown Car Guy claims that on 1 July
2021, the newly re-elected Mayor Khan answered a GLA Mayor’s Question from
the previous month. He replied that he had no plans to expand the ULEZ zone
past the North/South Circular Roads. Two things happened since. In late
2021, the Mayor became Chair of the C40 group of mayors that sought a drastic
reduction (around 30%) of the number of cars. It is also well-known that the
Mayor sought new sources of income. Since deciding to expand ULEZ in November
2022, the Mayor has rigidly parroted that it’s all about air quality and
‘London’s toxic air’. He is far from convincing. ·
In 2016, speculation
from the Royal College of Physicians concluded that there could be an
average three days of life lost per person in the whole of the UK due to air
pollution. After some number-crunching, they constructed a statistic of
‘40,000 equivalent lives lost’ per year. ·
The Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence
Communication is hosted within a mathematics and statistics department at the
University of Cambridge. It provides a critical
review of the ’40,000’ in detail ·
The GLA also admitted
that the contrived ‘deaths’ figure was not real people’, just ‘a statistical
construct’ in its ‘Better Environment, Better Health’ publications. ·
Professor Tony Frew pf the University of Brighton
coincidentally served on the pollution committee (COMEAP) that was previously
concerned with the figure. He described
the 40,000 deaths as a ‘Zombie’ statistic that refuses to die. He gave an interview
to TalkRadio. ·
Professor Frew is also on the YouTube feature -
“Mayor Khan manipulating the air pollution figures!!”.
He made several relevant points, describing air pollution as having “a very
small impact on everyone, maybe 3 days off everyone’s life. If all transport (trains as well as cars)
were banned, it would remove only 1/7 of the pollution. If all transport except
bicycles were banned, about a month (20-40 days) could be gained for those
living to 80+. At best, if you removed all pollution from all sources, it
could add maybe 6-9 months. However this would mean no building sites, no power
stations, etc – and it would be too cold to live in the UK. |
|
|||||||||||||
EXPERIENCE
ABROAD AND INDOOR COMPARISONS ·
Particulates are microscopically
small particles of such things as dust, pollen, mould and even sea spray. A
large analysis of the daily air quality and daily death data from California
reports that there is not any association between particulates and death.
(See ‘Air quality and acute
deaths in California, 2000-2012, Lopiano KK et al., arXiv.org, arX-iv:1502.03062 ). ·
The concerns over particulate matter (PM’s) as a
“significant concern for health”, and Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), have
been comprehensively challenged in law in the USA. There is no evidence that
anyone has ever died from an overdose of PM’s and legal challenges against
the US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) position on the medical effects of PM’s has been
successful. In the US, the EPA even undertook human
experiments in sealed chambers with concentrations 17 times greater than the
level “presumed to be dangerous to health” and even went as high as 21 times
greater than the EPA’s own 24-hour maximum concentration levels. No-one died
or even became ill. (as reported extensively in
“Scare Pollution” by Steve Milloy ISBN 978-0-9982597-1-0). ·
Ironically, extensive research in the USA shows that indoor
air can be up to 100 times more ‘toxic’ than outdoors. (See https://www3.epa.gov/air/basic.html,
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/indoor-air-more-polluted-outdoor-air)
This is mirrored by
a survey
of four households in different parts of the UK, illustrating that outdoor
air quality is over three times better than indoors. ·
Some critics are all too keen to attribute asthma to
vehicles. In fact, mechanisms are not fully understood, but there seems to be
genetic factors and, according to Asthma & Lung UK, several ‘triggers’ of
the symptoms of asthma: hot and cold weather, sudden changes in
temperature, thunderstorms; colds, flu
and viruses; pollution such as cigarette smoke; dust mites, pet hair, exercise*,
female hormones, sexual activity, emotions, stress, alcohol, Valium,
recreational drugs; scented products like perfume, aftershave, scented
candles or oils; latex; food sensitivities (e.g. sulphites, histamines) and
(for a small minority) food allergens are gluten (from wheat and cereal
products), shellfish, eggs, milk, tree nuts, peanuts, sesame seeds, and soya. However
an established article
is worth a read as it explores the actual causes: “There is no correlation between levels of
vehicle emissions and asthma incidence.” Taken from the 1995 Department of Health
Study on the Causes of Asthma, by Dr Kenneth Calman,
Government Chief Medical Officer … In
1999, a report for the NHS executive entitled Transport and Health in London
concluded (section C5 p44): “…the available evidence does not support a
causative role for outdoor air pollution” and “Factors other than air pollution are
influential with regard to the initiation and provocation of asthma"... *Ironically TfL are always recommending exercise,
such as cycling and walking! It’s funny that if London’s air is so filthy/toxic
(as the Mayor claims), why is he always urging people to walk and cycle in
it? |
|
|||||||||||||
‘LONDON’S TOXIC MAYOR’ IS ALL HOT AIR ‘’Clean Air Khan’ has
also – repeatedly - let off lavish fireworks displays when it suited him,
including 12,000 fireworks on New
Year’s Eve 2022:
While telling everyone else to
reduce their emissions, Khan and his team are quite happy to take
international flights
when it suits them. The Mayor has also
been encouraging
people out of their cars and onto “cleaner public transport” and to use the tube
more
- despite researchers’ recent report noting that particulate
(PM) levels on the Underground are not just higher than London background
levels, they are above World Health Organization (WHO) defined limits. |
|
|||||||||||||
Here’s
further information from Dr Michael Simons PhD MRSC who has analysed TfL’s ULEZ consultation
documents: Minimal benefit from the
Mayor’s ULEZ proposals TfL figures only project two
days life prolongation Asthma and COPD in the context
of ULEZ Pollutants on the tube
network compared Projected value of
health ‘benefits’ minimal vs cost |
|
|||||||||||||
Please help spread the
word and - better still - actively support us in calling for a fairer deal for
drivers who already pay billions a year in taxes. Campaign articles index and data protection
|
|