←back to thread

308 points tangjurine | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.617s | source
Show context
Aurornis ◴[] No.43529859[source]
I'm all for installing air filters in classrooms for a number of reasons, but I also think the extreme results from this study aren't going to hold up to further research.

From the paper:

> To do so, I leverage a unique setting arising from the largest gas leak in United States history, whereby the offending gas company installed air filters in every classroom, office and common area for all schools within five miles of the leak (but not beyond). This variation allows me to compare student achievement in schools receiving air filters relative to those that did not using a spatial regression discontinuity design.

In other words, the paper looked at test scores at different schools in different areas on different years and assumed that the only change was the air filters. Anyone who has worked with school kids knows that the variations between classes from year to year can be extreme, as can differences produced by different teachers or even school policies.

Again, I think air filtration is great indoors, but expecting test scores to improve dramatically like this is not realistic. This feels like another extremely exaggerated health claim, like past claims made about fish oil supplements. Fish oil was briefly thought to have extreme positive health benefits from a number of very small studies like this, but as sample sizes became larger and studies became higher quality, most of the beneficial effects disappeared.

replies(13): >>43529891 #>>43529985 #>>43530174 #>>43530203 #>>43530314 #>>43530415 #>>43530679 #>>43530828 #>>43530901 #>>43531102 #>>43531116 #>>43532636 #>>43538480 #
1. MPSFounder ◴[] No.43530314[source]
I wish we made more efforts to check air quality. I went to a great school, and the water filter hadnt been replaced since 2005 (it was 2012 at the time, and filters were supposed to be replaced every 6 months). My point is people take it for granted that air quality or water quality in the US is great, but if we checked, I bet most of us are exposed to cancerous materials all the time that could be easily prevented (the water stations rn are made of plastic (PVC), which leaches in the water over time and leads to nanoplastics accumulating in all of us. Easily prevented through more expensive steel pipes). Hell, my office had asbestos in the ceiling that was painted over! It sucks we lack regulation, as I do not believe it is my job to check these things and report them, and I got tired of it. Given the EPA is lacking funds, it is imperative all of us do due diligence so our children do not experience the cancer rates that are ravaging us (our cancer rates are 30% higher than Europe once you rule out lung cancer, which is a result of their smoking habits. The europeans love their cigs).
replies(2): >>43531006 #>>43540874 #
2. eru ◴[] No.43531006[source]
They would have probably been better off without a water filter?

Your local utility should send you water that doesn't need further filtering.

3. LorenPechtel ◴[] No.43540874[source]
Steel pipes? You realize steel that can be made into a pipe contains some metals you want to minimize your exposure to?

As for painting over asbestos--that's actually considered acceptable. Asbestos sitting there isn't going to hurt you. Asbestos only hurts you when it's disturbed. Removing intact asbestos is likely to increase your exposure, not decrease it.

As for cancer--why are you so sure it's chemicals and not lifestyle?

replies(1): >>43542865 #
4. MPSFounder ◴[] No.43542865[source]
I cannot be sure. Causation is very difficult to pinpoint. Not all steel leaches (hell, we use stainless steel cups often). I will take steel over plastics any given day of the week. Regarding paint, sure, but paint peels, and next you are breathing microdoses of asbestos.