Studies in the past have already shown that small particles of soot in diesel exhaust can travel from the nose and lodge in the brain, but this is the first time researchers have found actual adverse effects on brain activity.
"We can only speculate what these effects may mean for the chronic exposure to air pollution encountered in busy cities where the levels of such soot particles can be very high," said Zuyd University researcher Paul Borm in an interview with Reuters. "It is conceivable that the long-term effects of exposure to traffic nanoparticles may interfere with normal brain function and information processing."
Scientists put ten volunteers in a room filled with exhaust from a diesel engine (comparable with levels of an urban environment) for an hour and found that after just 30 minutes brain wave patterns displayed a ‘stress’ response. To make matters worse, researchers also said the small particles in the exhaust are also linked with respiratory and cardiovascular disease.
This is worrying considering that carmakers around the world are trying to increase the number of diesel models in their fleets, and it will be interesting to see if new emissions regulations will have a genuine effect on air quality in the near future.
Reader Comments
Tue Mar 11 2008 11:27 AM
chris says
ok... wait one minute... hold the effin phone.
you cant put 10 people into a room, tell them to breath diesel fumes for an hour, see signs of stress, and call it a valid experiment.
you see, real scientists know about a thing called a "control". first of all, you'd need to do this with one person at a time, to rule out any sort of sociological effects. and then, you'd have to make sure that the people ur putting into the room dont know what is going to happen. just tell them theyre going to sit in a room for an hour. some of them you gas, some of them you dont. thats to rule out any psychological effects. and then, you dont do one run of the experiment with 10 people. thats far too low of a sample to even be considered statistically relevant by any means. you'd need to put 200 people into the room, individually, and run the experiment 200 times, just to get an accurate measurement. and dont forget, you'd need to run it another 200 times without the gas.
god i hate bogus "science" claims.
Tue Mar 11 2008 1:11 PM
Gus says
Still, I'd agree that when a bus or a semi puffs out a big cloud of diesel exhaust in front of me, I get stressed.
And does this study apply to the new diesels with the super filtering technologies or to the big old schoolbus from 1950?
Tue Mar 11 2008 1:13 PM
Gus says
The real reason diesel won't take off is the price.
Today at the corner pump in LA:
Regular: $3.49
Premium: $3.79
Diesel: $4.09
No one is going to see that and think "wow, I'm going to buy a diesel!"...
Tue Mar 11 2008 1:25 PM
Ayax says
Whlie Chris has a valid point, you cant expect to put people in a room and not mention to them you're gonna gas em... thats just wrong, even in the name of science. What could be done is individual responses, tell them you're going to be putting gas in the chamber within reasonable levels and that no long term hazard exists. All that considered, I'm quite sure the results would be very similar. Inhaling Diesel fumes cant be good, it doesn't take a scientist to know that.
Tue Mar 11 2008 2:45 PM
CarFan says
Hold on folks... has anyone here considered that the same experiement with Carbon Monoxide would KILL those people!!!, yet we're arguing that a LESS damaging gas than what is currently being used in billions of vehicles should not be used?!?! where is the logic?
Also note the study says breathing diesel fumes "can" trigger a brain response that itself "could" have a long term effect. Two maybes in one sentence really adds to a small chance and not a very worthy or reputable study.
It begs the question, who is sponsoring this study? A Dutch Lab funded by Japanese interests perhaps? (so they can hide their under the belt intent?).
I'll take slower brain and lower mileage over DEATH any time thank you very much.
Tue Mar 11 2008 4:32 PM
chris says
gus: when volkswagen brings a 70 mpg hybrid deisel polo to the states, u bet that tanned so-cal butt of yours that people will buy a diesel.
Ayax: ever gone to university? people will participate in any kind of study for money. students doubly so. I participated in a 4 hour psychological research group just to get another 3% on my final grade in my psych elective. with medical and physical studies like this, what you do is you draw from a pool of participants. the people sign up for studies and fill out a form stating what they would give permission to be studied on (lungs, skin, eyes) what ever... and you dont hear from any one for a couple months and u get a call saying "we want you to sit in a room for 1 hour. we'll pay you $100". you've already forgotten what you said u'd be willing to partake in, but you trust that you had a logical thought process when you filled out the forms. that completes the "blind" part of an experiment. the "rats" dont know what theyre being tested on. for a double blind, the researcher doesn't know either. more complicated, and not necessary in this case. telling some one that you're performing an experiment on them but you know it will be safe is a little contradictory. you sign away all those rights when you disclosed what you would allow them to test on you.
CarFan: research has shown carbon monoxide to be poisonous, yes, we all know that. but something you dont realize is that carbon monoxide makes up a tiny fraction of the gases coming out of your exhaust pipe. you'll die of asphixiation (lack of oxygen) long before you die of carbon monoxide poisoning if you were breathing pure exhaust fumes. diesel or petrol. doesnt matter. diesel fumes are fundamentally different than gasoline fumes because diesel doesn't burn as cleanly leaving carbon SOOT. not carbon monoxide. the soot isnt carbon dioxide gas; its much more similar to carbon monoxide in that it is a single atom, but clumped together to form a soot or ash. the point of this experiment was to show that the soot is so fine that it can enter your blood stream, and effect your brain in some measurable way.
once again, the double "maybe" just goes to prove my point. the experiment is grossly flawed and the sample size is rediculously small.
why is it that you assume some huge conspiracy to hide the intent? the study is probably right, but as a matter of science, its rediculously flawed.
and where the hell do you get a slower brain as a result of petrol fumes? if you inhale either petrol or diesel fumes, you'll suffer damage. the two gases are nearly identical.
Tue Mar 11 2008 9:51 PM
Gus says
Ahhh, but petrol engines don't have particulate emissions. That may be the crux of the whole thing.
I would want to know more about that side of the experiment.
I agree, the room full of stressed out people is bogus, but particulate matter in my brain is a no-no.
A 70 mpg polo might sell well, and yes my butt is very tan, thank you.
Wed Mar 12 2008 5:26 AM
joe blow says
Petrol engines dont have particulate emissions? Are you serious Gus? Think again.
Thu Mar 13 2008 8:26 AM
Paris says
Ever thought of particulate filters? Diesel cars are now much cleaner, more efficient and as satisfying to drive as petrol cars... But that's NOW that the technology really started to advance. What's so wrong with it anyway? :)
Leave a Comment
Login or register to leave comments.
Please keep your comments on topic. Your involvement is governed by our Privacy Policy and Terms.