EPA Ignores Science to Propose Most Expensive Regulation in History

[Muhammed]

The tree huggers want to punish and tax the citizens for Natures occurring events, like ozone.

Ozone in nature is balanced human activities disrupt that balance.
We can restore balance by changing the way we produce products.

Are you implying that humans are supernatural?

 

[Penelope]

The tree huggers want to punish and tax the citizens for Natures occurring events, like ozone.

Ozone in nature is balanced human activities disrupt that balance.
We can restore balance by changing the way we produce products.

In other words, Ozone occurs naturally. Attempting to reduce it to zero is a fool's errand. Any such attempt will cost astronomical amounts of money.

Does that just about get it?

Hmm so you think people are spending money trying to reduce the amount of "Ozone."

This is one of those times you look like a fool that I mentioned earlier.

What do you imagine the point of the proposed EPA regulation is? Yes, cutting down on Ozone emissions costs money, or do you imagine that complying with EPA regulations is cost free?

You pollute you pay too tough a concept for you?

No its not going to work that way, its cap and trade, so yes those who pollute will have to buy from countries that have credits and of course will raise prices for us consumers. That is how trickle down works, it doesn't , the bills trickle on down to us, the rich never pay. They will just raise our bills, auto prices and everything else. I think companies should just be fined to the hilt, forget this cap and trade stuff .

 

[RodISHI]

I don't want the pollution and river filled with shit that occurs in china or india....It is up to who governs to govern wisely of course so maybe the epa is going a little too far.

So do you think that the people mowing their lawns are polluting the crap out of rivers and streams?

If you remember my essay a couple of weeks ago I noted that the slow, steady increase in disorders such as autism, asthma, Type I diabetes and similar was utterly inconsistent with environmental poisoning. Specifically, we've not only done a lot to clean up the environment over the last 30-40 years (which should lead to a decrease in such conditions) we've also removed a huge number of chemical and other agents from our environment that the moonbats claimed caused these ailments. But the incidence kept rising.

The other explanation is that it's genetic, and our technological improvements in society allow people who would not be able to reproduce to do so in more cases than was previously true. If this is the case then the more technological advancement we make the more survivable a condition becomes, and thus the more-likely the genetic coding for it will be passed on. This in turn means that there will be a material and continuing increase in the incidence of such conditions.

That happens to match observations. A Thesis Begins To Validate....

Your little post addressed type I diabetes. It is type II diabetes on the rise along with the increase of spongy brain syndrome (Alzheimer disease). You address Autism and the connection is between altered genes and altered RNA. Common sense here can rule it does not take a genius to understand who's been fucking with the genes in a guess and by golly method for the last fifty years. Altering the genes in every aspect of food intake has weakened this nations people to the core. Being born with mutations because of the poisoning is not an improvement. Living on Earth: BPA Exposure Associated With Poor Parenting. Altering genes is not one an the same with using hybrid genes. The gene altering Nazi's who think they can control the world went after Dr Arpad Pusztai when he tried to inform the public about the extreme dangers of crossing species and they insured he would be silence and fired. This whole concept of well if we break it now we can fix it later does not work nor is it sustainable for any true life form. So what do we call terrorist who are willing to go against these Nazi's that believe they have the right to take over everyone's lives ISIS that is Institute of Science in Society.

 

[Care4all]

In all seriousness, I don't know how anyone can believe a blog called Pajama's Media... they did not source anything they said to any facts, that i could see...it was all speculative, conjecture, and the perfect example of what some on this site, actually consider news....

 

[daws101]

Rea

Still no answer cancer or cost?

Read my post...

It clearly shows the cancer link, Dumbass...

It does but it does not answer the question.

The estimated cost is in the OP...


All you have to do is put that fine Liberal education to work and read at a first-grade level...

Estimated cost of the EPA's program: $1.1 Trillion...

Consequences of doing it: Increased Global Warming and more cases of skin cancer (including Melanoma, the deadliest form of cancer).... Also, increased UV rays cause damage to plant life, increasing hunger....

Conclusion: Congratulations, once again you've made the village idiot look like an Einstein!!!!

Still not a answer cost or cancer
Btw there is nothing you can tell me about cancer that I don't already know .
Having survived leukemia I'm an expert.

I listed the estimated cost of the regulations, plus given you evidence of the increased cancer risk...

If you're too damn stupid to read, that's your problem...

False read all that , it's a dodge not an answer.

 

[daws101]

You might want to check yours.
I did not say your link were not credible .
False assumption is a classic example of inbreeding.

Then explain why we are trying to cure the hole in the ozone layer (and cut down on Global Warming and the detrimental effects of UV rays) by paying out all that money to REDUCE the amount of ozone...

And while you're at it, please explain why we REDUCED the amount of CFCs to PROTECT The ozone layer if we have TOO MUCH ozone...

Feel free to post links backing up your nonsense...

When you answer the question about cancer or money , I might think about it .till then no.

Ozone and UV: Where Are We Now? - SkinCancer.org


The stratospheric ozone layer absorbs most of the harmfulultraviolet B (UVB) radiation (shortwave UV rays measuring 280-315 nanometers, or nm) emitted by the sun. In small amounts, UVB radiation is helpful to life (e.g., for the production of vitamin D). But what happens when the ozone layer is threatened?


The more damage there is to the ozone layer, the more UVB rays that reach our bodies. UVB rays (as well as the sun's longer-wave, UVA rays, from 315-400 nm) can produce DNA damage in the skin and mucous membranes, causing genetic mutations that can lead to skin cancer, premature skin aging, cataracts and other eye conditions. Excessive UV exposure can also weaken immune system functioning, reducing our ability to fight off skin cancers and other maladies. Therefore, ozone loss is a serious health threat.

Reduced stratospheric ozone leads to increases in surfaceultraviolet (UV) radiation. UV light is divided into three bands: UVC (100-280 nanometers), UVB, and UVA. UVC is the most dangerous, but is mostly absorbed by oxygen and ozone molecules in the stratosphere and does not reach the earth's surface. When UV radiation passes through the earth's atmosphere, some of it collides with other molecules and particles, causing it to bounce around and change direction. This scattered UV radiation can increase sunburn risk even when you are in the shade.

UVB is partly scattered back to space by the atmosphere and absorbed by ozone, limiting how much reaches the earth throughout the year, while UVA is absorbed less by ozone and scattered less by the atmosphere; thus a larger percentage of UVA reaches the earth year-round. UVB strikes the earth more intensely during summer months when the sun is higher in the sky, so that the radiation travels on a shorter path through the atmosphere. Ozone and clouds are the most important factors in limiting UVB penetration. How much UV reaches the earth's surface depends on the amount of ozone overhead, clouds, small particles or aerosols, and pollution.

Measuring long-term changes in UV penetration is quite difficult. First, the amount of ozone overhead varies daily because of weather patterns, and to a lesser extent, due to ozone destruction by CFCs. Secondly, cloud systems change rapidly, and can cause the amount of surface UV to change by 10 to 50 percent (occasionally more) within minutes: While thick, uniform cloud layers allow little UV to arrive at the earth's surface, side reflections from tall, puffy clouds can actually enhance penetration of UV radiation by a few percent when compared with clear skies. As much as 80 percent of UV Radiation can pass through thin clouds that appear to block the sun, so that you can sunburn even on an apparently cloudy day. Since 1979, we have been able to estimate this large variation in UV levels on the ground by using satellites that measure ozone and cloud amounts over the entire earth, and then calculating the UV penetration to the ground. The calculations are validated by ground-based instruments.

Because of ozone depletion, by the mid-1990s average clear sky erythemal (skin reddening/sunburn-inducing) radiation had increased by about seven percent from levels in the 1970s at middle latitudes. This has fallen off somewhat and is now only about four percent higher than in the 1970s. [Figure 3].

FIGURE 3. The calculated percent change in UV irradiance caused by percent
changes in ozone over the continental United States. The ozone change is estimated
from satellite measurements over the United States.


I hope you don't mind scientific evidence...

Now we know that reducing the amount of ozone will cost money, so tell me...

Why should we spend that money to INCREASE Global Warming and kill people???

I'm waiting...

Still no answer cancer or cost?

This post clinched it for me.

Daws has been measured and found wanting.
Not a single bit of credible evidence for the opposite side of the issue.
Only diversion.

Why is it the intellectually challenged with out fail claim a victory when there is none then falsely assert that some bogus Imaginary and arbitrary measurement or test has been made to prove them correct?

 

[daws101]

The EPA isn't about science anyway...It's about politics.

Thanks Mr propaganda.

 

[g5000]

New rules could outlaw lawn mowing, add a parking tax and declare national parks "toxic."

When a story headlines with something like this, you know you are about to have a truckload of manufactured bullshit shoveled into your mouth.

 

[SwimExpert]

It's so hard to keep up with these people. First, the depletion of ozone was a bad thing, because it lets more UV light through the atmosphere and causing more skin cancer and increasing global warming. Now, it's a good thing, because it gives people asthma. Make up your minds already.

 

[Obiwan]

Rea
Read my post...

It clearly shows the cancer link, Dumbass...

It does but it does not answer the question.

The estimated cost is in the OP...


All you have to do is put that fine Liberal education to work and read at a first-grade level...

Estimated cost of the EPA's program: $1.1 Trillion...

Consequences of doing it: Increased Global Warming and more cases of skin cancer (including Melanoma, the deadliest form of cancer).... Also, increased UV rays cause damage to plant life, increasing hunger....

Conclusion: Congratulations, once again you've made the village idiot look like an Einstein!!!!

Still not a answer cost or cancer
Btw there is nothing you can tell me about cancer that I don't already know .
Having survived leukemia I'm an expert.

I listed the estimated cost of the regulations, plus given you evidence of the increased cancer risk...

If you're too damn stupid to read, that's your problem...

False read all that , it's a dodge not an answer.

It's really pretty simple...

Ozone blocks UV rays...

UV rays cause skin cancer ...

What is so hard to understand about that???

 

[Obiwan]

It's so hard to keep up with these people. First, the depletion of ozone was a bad thing, because it lets more UV light through the atmosphere and causing more skin cancer and increasing global warming. Now, it's a good thing, because it gives people asthma. Make up your minds already.

If you read the posts, you will see evidence that ozone doesn't cause asthma....

 

[daws101]

It does but it does not answer the question.

The estimated cost is in the OP...


All you have to do is put that fine Liberal education to work and read at a first-grade level...

Estimated cost of the EPA's program: $1.1 Trillion...

Consequences of doing it: Increased Global Warming and more cases of skin cancer (including Melanoma, the deadliest form of cancer).... Also, increased UV rays cause damage to plant life, increasing hunger....

Conclusion: Congratulations, once again you've made the village idiot look like an Einstein!!!!

Still not a answer cost or cancer
Btw there is nothing you can tell me about cancer that I don't already know .
Having survived leukemia I'm an expert.

I listed the estimated cost of the regulations, plus given you evidence of the increased cancer risk...

If you're too damn stupid to read, that's your problem...

False read all that , it's a dodge not an answer.

It's really pretty simple...

Ozone blocks UV rays...

UV rays cause skin cancer ...

What is so hard to understand about that???

all the stats there are do not answer my question....which is , are you ...yes you... more concerned about the cost or cancer.

 

[daws101]

How does ozone affect people with asthma?
There are two major mechanisms by which people with asthma might be more severely affected by ozone than those without asthma. The first is that those with asthma might be more responsive or sensitive to ozone and therefore experience the lung function changes and respiratory symptoms common to all, but either at lower concentrations or with greater magnitude. There is evidence from some controlled exposure studies and some epidemiologic studies that this may be true. By far, the greater individual and public health concern is that the injury, inflammation, and increased airway reactivity induced by ozone exposure may result in a worsening of a person's underlying asthma status, increasing the probability of an asthma exacerbation or a requirement for more treatment.

Some panel studies have found relationships of ambient ozone concentration with increased asthma symptoms and with increased medication use among children with asthma. Other epidemiologic studies have documented relationships between higher ozone levels and increased ER visits and hospital admissions for asthma in the warm season. In a camp for children with asthma in New York, it was observed that on days when ozone concentrations were high, children in camp used their asthma inhalers more frequently than on days when ozone levels were low. Presumably this was due to a perception that their asthma was worse on those days. Measures of peak expiratory flow in these children were lower on days when ozone levels were high, supporting this hypothesis. Although results are somewhat inconsistent among panel studies of asthmatics, one of the largest (Mortimer 2002) with 846 asthmatic children from eight U.S. urban areas monitored during the course of a summer found evidence for lower values of peak expiratory flow and an increased prevalence of respiratory symptoms for several mornings after days when ozone levels were high. Reductions in morning lung function and an increase in morning symptoms are an indication of worsening asthma status and are consistent with increased asthma exacerbations. There is some evidence that children with more severe asthma are more likely to experience these ozone-related effects than those with mild asthma.



Enlarge or print this figure
In Atlanta, GA, in Buffalo and New York City, NY, and in many other places throughout the United States, visits to the hospital emergency room for asthma were more frequent on days when ozone concentrations were high (generally above 110 ppb as a 1-hour average or 60 ppb as a 7-hour average) compared to low ozone days. Similarly, in some places, hospital admissions for asthma were higher following days when ozone levels were elevated with effects generally being larger in the warm season than in the cold season.



Enlarge or print this figure
The validity of these epidemiologic observations has been supported by the results of controlled experimental ozone exposures in human volunteers in which markers of asthma status were measured after ozone and after clean air exposures. In these studies, ozone has been demonstrated to worsen airway inflammation, to increase the airway response to inhaled allergen, and to increase nonspecific airway responsiveness, each of which is likely to indicate worsening asthma.

In several studies, people with asthma exposed to ozone were observed to have a greater influx in polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMNs) and larger changes in other markers of airway inflammation than individuals without asthma, suggesting a more intense inflammatory response. In one study ozone increased the numbers of eosinophils found in the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid of people with asthma. In contrast, eosinophils are not found in the BAL of individuals without asthma as a result of ozone exposure.

In another study, house dust mite (HDM) sensitive individuals underwent airway challenge with HDM antigen after ozone exposure and after air exposure. As seen in Figure 13, after ozone exposure, the concentration of HDM needed to cause a 20% fall in FEV1 was reduced compared to the air exposure, suggesting that people with asthma would have a greater response to environmental levels of HDM following ozone exposure.



Enlarge or print this figure


Many studies have demonstrated that nonspecific airway responsiveness is greater following ozone exposure. Overall, these experimental findings in humans and laboratory animals are consistent with ozone causing an increase in asthma severity and, taken together, provide a plausible biological mechanism for the epidemiological observations. This suggests that the observed relationships between ambient ozone exposure and the higher probability of experiencing an asthma attack and other manifestations of worsening asthma are causal.


Health Effects in Patients with Asthma | Ozone and Your Patients' Health | US EPA

 

[daws101]

Air pollution data and exposure indicators
We obtained hourly ambient ozone data from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). These data (reported in parts per billion) were measured hourly for each day. We used the 8-hr maximum hourly value during the peak outdoor exposure time (1000 to 1800 hours) in this study to represent the daily ozone level. We included 32 ozone monitoring sites and divided them into 11 ozone regions in New York State (Figure 1) according to their spatial and temporal correlations, wind direction, and traffic pattern. In general, we used a linear regression model with a fixed-origin intercept to assess the spatial correlation among monitor pairs as a function of distance. We performed empirical semivariance analysis and a total count of occurrences above a specific concentration to evaluate the spatial variation. The resulting 11 ozone regions are very similar to the air quality health advisory regions developed by NYSDEC (2008). If more than one monitoring site was located in one ozone region, we used the average value of the 8-hr maximum from multiple monitoring sites to represent the regional data. We assessed children’s chronic ozone exposure as both continuous and categorical variables by identifying the individual ozone region based on their residential histories. The continuous ozone variable included the mean concentrations and the exceedance proportion. Mean concentration was the arithmetic mean of the regional 8-hr ozone maximum for each child during two different time periods: the entire follow-up period and ozone seasons (April–October) during the follow-up period. For children who had hospital admissions during the defined periods, we calculated the mean concentration between the date of birth and the date of admission. For children who had no hospital admissions, we calculated the mean concentration of the follow-up period and the ozone season between the date of birth and the end of the study. We assessed the risk of hospital admissions associated with chronic ozone exposure using a 1-ppb increase in mean concentration during the defined period. The exceedance proportion is the proportion of follow-up days with ozone levels > 70 ppb, which is our 90th percentile of year-round ozone over the entire follow-up period. This indicator not only reflects the specific days exposed to high ozone levels, but also includes the proportion of days exposed to high ozone levels for each child over the follow-up period. Therefore, it captures both the cumulative and chronic nature of exposures. We used the interquartile range (IQR; 75th to 25th quartile) as the unit change in the models for the continuous exceedance proportion exposure.


Figure 1
Ozone exposure regions in New York State used in this study. NYC, New York City.

Chronic Exposure to Ambient Ozone and Asthma Hospital Admissions among Children

 

[hortysir]

Really?

How about the abridged version, and maybe just a sprinkle of your own opinion on the subject?

 

[daws101]

Really?

How about the abridged version, and maybe just a sprinkle of your own opinion on the subject?

already given my pov. aren't you the ass hat who wanted opposing facts.?
gotta problems with multisyllabic words ?

 

[Obiwan]

Air pollution data and exposure indicators
We obtained hourly ambient ozone data from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). These data (reported in parts per billion) were measured hourly for each day. We used the 8-hr maximum hourly value during the peak outdoor exposure time (1000 to 1800 hours) in this study to represent the daily ozone level. We included 32 ozone monitoring sites and divided them into 11 ozone regions in New York State (Figure 1) according to their spatial and temporal correlations, wind direction, and traffic pattern. In general, we used a linear regression model with a fixed-origin intercept to assess the spatial correlation among monitor pairs as a function of distance. We performed empirical semivariance analysis and a total count of occurrences above a specific concentration to evaluate the spatial variation. The resulting 11 ozone regions are very similar to the air quality health advisory regions developed by NYSDEC (2008). If more than one monitoring site was located in one ozone region, we used the average value of the 8-hr maximum from multiple monitoring sites to represent the regional data. We assessed children’s chronic ozone exposure as both continuous and categorical variables by identifying the individual ozone region based on their residential histories. The continuous ozone variable included the mean concentrations and the exceedance proportion. Mean concentration was the arithmetic mean of the regional 8-hr ozone maximum for each child during two different time periods: the entire follow-up period and ozone seasons (April–October) during the follow-up period. For children who had hospital admissions during the defined periods, we calculated the mean concentration between the date of birth and the date of admission. For children who had no hospital admissions, we calculated the mean concentration of the follow-up period and the ozone season between the date of birth and the end of the study. We assessed the risk of hospital admissions associated with chronic ozone exposure using a 1-ppb increase in mean concentration during the defined period. The exceedance proportion is the proportion of follow-up days with ozone levels > 70 ppb, which is our 90th percentile of year-round ozone over the entire follow-up period. This indicator not only reflects the specific days exposed to high ozone levels, but also includes the proportion of days exposed to high ozone levels for each child over the follow-up period. Therefore, it captures both the cumulative and chronic nature of exposures. We used the interquartile range (IQR; 75th to 25th quartile) as the unit change in the models for the continuous exceedance proportion exposure.


Figure 1
Ozone exposure regions in New York State used in this study. NYC, New York City.

Chronic Exposure to Ambient Ozone and Asthma Hospital Admissions among Children

Asthma is treatable, and the causes aren't always clear (although they seem to be linked to a combination of hereditary and environmental factors)...

And there are actually a LOT of different triggers...
Asthma Causes - Mayo Clinic

It's practically impossible to do away with all of those triggers, but Global Warming might eventually cure ONE... COLD WEATHER !!!

Why does Obozo hate people with asthma so much he wants to work against them on that????

 

[daws101]

Air pollution data and exposure indicators
We obtained hourly ambient ozone data from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). These data (reported in parts per billion) were measured hourly for each day. We used the 8-hr maximum hourly value during the peak outdoor exposure time (1000 to 1800 hours) in this study to represent the daily ozone level. We included 32 ozone monitoring sites and divided them into 11 ozone regions in New York State (Figure 1) according to their spatial and temporal correlations, wind direction, and traffic pattern. In general, we used a linear regression model with a fixed-origin intercept to assess the spatial correlation among monitor pairs as a function of distance. We performed empirical semivariance analysis and a total count of occurrences above a specific concentration to evaluate the spatial variation. The resulting 11 ozone regions are very similar to the air quality health advisory regions developed by NYSDEC (2008). If more than one monitoring site was located in one ozone region, we used the average value of the 8-hr maximum from multiple monitoring sites to represent the regional data. We assessed children’s chronic ozone exposure as both continuous and categorical variables by identifying the individual ozone region based on their residential histories. The continuous ozone variable included the mean concentrations and the exceedance proportion. Mean concentration was the arithmetic mean of the regional 8-hr ozone maximum for each child during two different time periods: the entire follow-up period and ozone seasons (April–October) during the follow-up period. For children who had hospital admissions during the defined periods, we calculated the mean concentration between the date of birth and the date of admission. For children who had no hospital admissions, we calculated the mean concentration of the follow-up period and the ozone season between the date of birth and the end of the study. We assessed the risk of hospital admissions associated with chronic ozone exposure using a 1-ppb increase in mean concentration during the defined period. The exceedance proportion is the proportion of follow-up days with ozone levels > 70 ppb, which is our 90th percentile of year-round ozone over the entire follow-up period. This indicator not only reflects the specific days exposed to high ozone levels, but also includes the proportion of days exposed to high ozone levels for each child over the follow-up period. Therefore, it captures both the cumulative and chronic nature of exposures. We used the interquartile range (IQR; 75th to 25th quartile) as the unit change in the models for the continuous exceedance proportion exposure.


Figure 1
Ozone exposure regions in New York State used in this study. NYC, New York City.

Chronic Exposure to Ambient Ozone and Asthma Hospital Admissions among Children

Asthma is treatable, and the causes aren't always clear (although they seem to be linked to a combination of hereditary and environmental factors)...

And there are actually a LOT of different triggers...
Asthma Causes - Mayo Clinic

It's practically impossible to do away with all of those triggers, but Global Warming might eventually cure ONE... COLD WEATHER !!!

Why does Obozo hate people with asthma so much he wants to work against them on that????

cost or cancer?

 

[Obiwan]

Air pollution data and exposure indicators
We obtained hourly ambient ozone data from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). These data (reported in parts per billion) were measured hourly for each day. We used the 8-hr maximum hourly value during the peak outdoor exposure time (1000 to 1800 hours) in this study to represent the daily ozone level. We included 32 ozone monitoring sites and divided them into 11 ozone regions in New York State (Figure 1) according to their spatial and temporal correlations, wind direction, and traffic pattern. In general, we used a linear regression model with a fixed-origin intercept to assess the spatial correlation among monitor pairs as a function of distance. We performed empirical semivariance analysis and a total count of occurrences above a specific concentration to evaluate the spatial variation. The resulting 11 ozone regions are very similar to the air quality health advisory regions developed by NYSDEC (2008). If more than one monitoring site was located in one ozone region, we used the average value of the 8-hr maximum from multiple monitoring sites to represent the regional data. We assessed children’s chronic ozone exposure as both continuous and categorical variables by identifying the individual ozone region based on their residential histories. The continuous ozone variable included the mean concentrations and the exceedance proportion. Mean concentration was the arithmetic mean of the regional 8-hr ozone maximum for each child during two different time periods: the entire follow-up period and ozone seasons (April–October) during the follow-up period. For children who had hospital admissions during the defined periods, we calculated the mean concentration between the date of birth and the date of admission. For children who had no hospital admissions, we calculated the mean concentration of the follow-up period and the ozone season between the date of birth and the end of the study. We assessed the risk of hospital admissions associated with chronic ozone exposure using a 1-ppb increase in mean concentration during the defined period. The exceedance proportion is the proportion of follow-up days with ozone levels > 70 ppb, which is our 90th percentile of year-round ozone over the entire follow-up period. This indicator not only reflects the specific days exposed to high ozone levels, but also includes the proportion of days exposed to high ozone levels for each child over the follow-up period. Therefore, it captures both the cumulative and chronic nature of exposures. We used the interquartile range (IQR; 75th to 25th quartile) as the unit change in the models for the continuous exceedance proportion exposure.


Figure 1
Ozone exposure regions in New York State used in this study. NYC, New York City.

Chronic Exposure to Ambient Ozone and Asthma Hospital Admissions among Children

Asthma is treatable, and the causes aren't always clear (although they seem to be linked to a combination of hereditary and environmental factors)...

And there are actually a LOT of different triggers...
Asthma Causes - Mayo Clinic

It's practically impossible to do away with all of those triggers, but Global Warming might eventually cure ONE... COLD WEATHER !!!

Why does Obozo hate people with asthma so much he wants to work against them on that????

cost or cancer?

Gee, did you know that one trigger for asthma can be your Cologne or deodorant???

So, why don't you play "stinky" for a while... That's better than taking steps that can give people a DEADLY form of cancer in order to make up for you smelling "purty"...

 

[Iceweasel]

Many studies have demonstrated that nonspecific airway responsiveness is greater following ozone exposure. Overall, these experimental findings in humans and laboratory animals are consistent with ozone causing an increase in asthma severity and, taken together, provide a plausible biological mechanism for the epidemiological observations. This suggests that the observed relationships between ambient ozone exposure and the higher probability of experiencing an asthma attack and other manifestations of worsening asthma are causal.

Lots of if ands or buts in that op-ed. Try again.