The city of Delhi needs a doctor to rid it of the demon of pollution. Unfortunately some doctors say pollution is not a problem
PEOPLE in India have by and large been ignorant of pollution and have remained unconcerned about environmental issues. But the problems of pollution forced residents of Delhi to look up and ask whether pollution in the city has been affecting their health? The answer they received recently was strange, to say the least.
To a lay person it would appear that pollution does affect health. Surprisingly some doctors do not agree. Neither does the doctor-turned politician, Harsh Vardhan, who is today Delhi's health minister.
If recent reports in the press are to be believed, a study conducted by the Centre for Occupational and Environment Medicine at the Maulana Azad Medical College states that pollution does not cause diseases like asthma, heart ailments or allergy, as most mortals believe.
What is surprising is that Harsh Vardhan seems to agree with the study. Are the doctors and the minister then wishing away the health-damaging effects of pollution? Is all this an exercise at resorting to an age-old solution? If you can't solve a problem, convince the people that it isn't a problem. In a recent statement, Harsh Vardhan has almost gone on to assure residents of Delhi that they need not worry about the increasing levels of pollution in the city because there is no evidence to link it to the incidence of disease.
Unfortunately Delhi already has the embarrassing status of being the fourth-most polluted city in the world and is already competing with Mexico City for the top spot. This is good reason not to believe in the words of the Maulana Azad doctors. Therefore, if you are a sceptic you might still want to keep your gas-mask handy for, in another five years, it will be the only way to ensure that the air you breathe is safe.
The newspaper report has quoted Harsh Vardhan as saying, "There is no evidence to relate pollution to heart, lung and skin diseases." Perhaps, the minister would like to take some time off from his busy schedule to explain why 10,000 deaths occur in Delhi annually due to diseases that have been medically diagnosed as "pollution-related".
The health minister went on record to state, "All pollution does is show symptoms of, say, asthma, but it does not cause fresh cases of the disease."
The Maulana Azad study and this statement are clearly an attempt to oversimplify the issue. The study also tries to brush aside the glaring evidence supplied by reports from across the globe that show -- quite convincingly -- that pollution causes heart, lung, eye and skin diseases.
A study conducted by the American Lung Association in 1992 proved that pollution decreases lung capacity in children. And a project sponsored by the European Commission's Science and Research Directorate in 1996, where 11 research groups analysed data in 15 cities in Europe, showed clearly that increases in suspended particulate matter, sulphur dioxide or ozone can significantly increase respiratory deaths and hospital treatment for respiratory illnesses. These health effects were seen at pollution levels much lower than those present in most Indian cities today.
The Maulana Azad researchers have also chosen to underplay evidence from earlier investigations that were conducted in Delhi itself. A World Bank study, conducted between 1991-92, showed that over 7,500 people died premature deaths every year due to pollution. The Centre for Science and Environment, carried out its own study that showed that by 1995 this figure had gone up to a shocking 10,000.
S K Chabra, head of the cardio-respiratory department of Patel Chest Institute, who carried out a study in 1994 in Delhi has revealed that the incidence of asthma in school children was 11-12 per cent. Chabra concluded that if cases of children who showed asthma symptoms at some time in the past were included, then this figure would go up to 16-17 per cent. This means a quarter of a million children in Delhi suffer from the disease -- the incidence of it being almost 12 times more than the national average.
Therefore Chabra finds it hard to agree with the study. According to him, "It is an oversimplification of facts to say that pollution only causes symptoms."
The study solicitously advises us that the best form of protection against pollution is to be neither underweight nor overweight, because toxins tend to lodge themselves in body fat.
If pollution was not hazardous to health there would be no reason to seek protection against it. It also goes to say that those who come from rural areas are very vulnerable to pollution. In other words, those who come from a clean environment tend to fall ill when they come to Delhi.
Therefore, we would suggest to all the good doctors involved in the study to carry on as if they had never conduced such a study and to recognise pollution for what it is: bad for health.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.