Kip Hansen’s opinion — January 19, 2023
No they do not. True, it doesn’t create an informative OpEd.
I already know that…. “There’s a study!” There’s always a study when the press and government power-seekers suggest doing something enticing like banning natural gas stoves and home heating appliances. There have been other tidbits here (and throughout the press) about whether “Government is coming to get your gas stove!”. They are, but that’s not what I’m writing about today.
What started the press frenzy, besides the hypocrisy of Richard Trumka Jr.a commissioner on US Consumer Product Safety, is a study that has been explained in a New York Times OpEd by Farhad Manjoo like this:
“About 13 percent of childhood asthma cases in the U.S. can be attributed to gas stoves, a recent study found — a population-level impact similar to that of smoke exposure. cigarette.”
Recent research is: “Population prevalence of gas stoves and childhood asthma in the United States“ by Talor Gruenwald, Brady A. Seals, Luke D. Knibbs and H. Dean Hosgood III, published in International journal of environmental research and public health it is “an open access journal published semi-monthly online with an article processing fee (APC) paid by the authors or their organizations.” Some will interpret this to mean a “Pay-to-play online magazine“.
And who are the authors? The lead author is Talor Gruenwald – the organization is listed as “RMI, Zero Carbon Building” – and who is RMI? Rocky Mountain Institute, Amory Lovin’s is the founder. Taylor Gruenwald is offered at energy center such as providing “quantitative analysis and policy” research supporting the elimination of fossil fuel use in buildings at the Rocky Mountain Institute.” same author Brady A. Seals is also at RMI. The other two coauthors are real epidemiologists: Luke D. Knibbs and H. Dean Hosgood IIIstudy air pollution and other issues.
So this is an activity-oriented study.
Does this study actually measure children’s exposure to gas stoves, water heaters, and fireplaces (or any pollution they may cause) in homes where children have asthma? are not? Of course not. Does this study actually measure any homes for NO?2 What is the extent and connection of this to children’s asthma? Of course not.
This is a “meta-analysis” study. This means this study tried to combine the findings of previous studies, some dating back many years, that seemed to study the current issue.
Did those, that Do studies really measure any children’s real-world exposure to pollution from the use of gas appliances in the homes of children with asthma? Not that I can find. In fact, there is no Supplemental Information for this study and therefore no list of “Identified Title Reviews”. 27 manuscripts as potentially appropriate. The full manuscripts (n = 27) were independently reviewed by the co-authors; There are no reports of a new association between gas stove use and asthma in children, particularly in North America or Europe..”
What did you say? Are there any studies that specifically address North America or Europe?
The problem is like this:
“The result is, previously reported effect size for current North American and European asthma combined (weighted inverse variance; Nlearn = 10; Odds ratio (OR) = 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.12–1.57) was used in the PAF estimate.”
They don’t really seem to make a new research on the impact of gas stove use and asthma – they used the “effect size” from a 2013 study which in itself is a meta-analysisin which the authors in 2013 reanalyzed (tortured) each of the original studies’ data until it admitted that gas stoves were bad.
The 2013 study used data from some even earlier studies, such as the 1978 study that actually measured NO2 level and found that NO2 levels in homes with cooking or gas heating in children’s bedrooms averaged 0.03 ppm while ambient outdoor air in the neighborhood was NOT2 level 0.02 ppm. We have to wonder about the tremendous power of that additional 1/100 ratioorder of one part per million to harm children’s health.
In another examined study, the finding was: “In the 1977 cross-sectional study, there was only a prevalence of day or night cough in boys (p < 0.02) and chest colds in girls (p). < 0.05) was found to be statistically significant. are higher in children from homes that use gas for cooking than in children from homes that use electricity.” (Note: Not asthma.]Yes, gas stove causes boys cough and girl to catch a cold in their chest.
Experiments found no effect of gas cooktops on the respiratory health of children, with the following findings: “No association was found between the type of fuel used for indoor cooking and the rate of incidence of respiratory symptoms and illnesses that the mother recalls after allowing for the influence of gender, social class and smoking parents.”
Almost all modern research on gas appliances and asthma in children begins with some version of the following: “Gas stoves emit pollutants that irritate the respiratory tract. U.S. children under 6 years of age living in homes that use gas stoves for cooking or heating are at increased risk for asthma, wheezing, and decreased lung function.”
Bottom line:
1. Gas stoves are believed to cause respiratory illnesses in children, such as asthma, which are widely documented in the literature. Hardly any real research measure the child’s exposure to the hypothetical cause: number of hours in contact with the amount of gas stove used; measure NO2 indoors, whether there are multiple gas-using appliances (water heaters, tumble dryers, heaters) or the surroundings NO2 in the child’s outdoor or school environment. Many studies have not documented or taken into account parental smoking in the home.
2. In UK studies, it was found that poorer families used stoves or ovens to heat the house – significantly increasing the by-products of combustion in the home . Homes that use ovens to heat the house are unlikely to leave windows open for proper ventilation.
3. This topic exposes the commonly known “know-how” aspect of health science in particular. Medical Science has decided that gas stoves are not good – based on the clearest evidence. Therefore, every new study is based on older studies, which themselves are even older studies, dating back decades, that “so to speak.” Thus we have Salt Wars, Sugar Wars, Obesity Wars, Med Diet Wars, PM2.5 Wars – all based on the same kind unstable science. What we need in these areas of research is to “start from scratch” suitable controlled, more or less random designs (RCDs). And some are simply Good Science.
4. I have little doubt that there is a concerted effort coming from the anti-fossil fuel camp to create more “science” condemning household gas appliances (stoves, ovens, water heaters). and fireplaces) are “harmful to children’s health” until the end of the ban on the use of natural gas in the home. They used to have some success with states and cities. With enough “evidence” (no matter how thin and ephemeral), advocacy groups can petition or sue (as in sue and settle) EPA for “relief”.
Sequence of events:
1) Trumca [US Consumer Product Safety commissioner ] proposed in October (2022) that the CPSC consulted the public on the hazards associated with gas stoves.
2) The Rocky Mountain Institute submitted a meta-analytical article based on decades-old studies to a journal on November 4, 2022, to be published just before Christmas 2022.
3) Armed with “new research” Trumka claims on January 9, 2023 that gas stoves are harmful and Bloomberg had this: “The US Consumer Product Safety Commission will move to regulate gas stoves as new research link them to childhood asthma.” “This is a hidden danger,” said Trumka Jr. speak. “All options are on the table. Unsafe products may be banned.” [ source ]
4) Chaos ensued with strong backing and denial from all parts of the US government.
# # # # #
Author’s comments:
Before anyone accuses me of thinking about conspiracies, let me be completely clear. The intention of the Rocky Mountain Institute study authors, Talor Gruenwald and Brady A. Seals, made it clear, as policy, that their purpose was to produce research that supports phasing out the use of fossil fuels in buildings.
And they did. Personally, I think they (RMI) informed the US Consumer Product Safety Commission in advance of their intention to do their research and what they would find, so it’s a good idea to start calling the public. they commented, RMI submitted the article (probably pre-print) to assist in finding the harm.
Anti-fossil fuel groups have way too much funding and very smart public relations experts are planning these campaigns – and they are very successful. To the detriment of the public interest.
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
Related
