Sean Semple1, Andrew Apsley1, Tengku Azmina Ibrahim2, Stephen W Turner2, John W Cherrie1. 1. Respiratory Group, Division of Applied Health Sciences, Scottish Centre for Indoor Air, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK Centre for Human Exposure Science, Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh, UK. 2. Respiratory Group, Division of Applied Health Sciences, Scottish Centre for Indoor Air, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Using data on fine particulate matter less than 2.5 μm (PM2.5) concentrations in smoking and non-smoking homes in Scotland to estimate the mass of PM2.5 inhaled by different age groups. METHODS: Data from four linked studies, with real-time measurements of PM2.5 in homes, were combined with data on typical breathing rates and time-activity patterns. Monte Carlo modelling was used to estimate daily PM2.5 intake, the percentage of total PM2.5 inhaled within the home environment and the percentage reduction in daily intake that could be achieved by switching to a smoke-free home. RESULTS: Median (IQR) PM2.5 concentrations from 93 smoking homes were 31 (10-111) μg/m(3) and 3 (2-6.5) μg/m(3) for the 17 non-smoking homes. Non-smokers living with smokers typically have average PM2.5 exposure levels more than three times higher than the WHO guidance for annual exposure to PM2.5 (10 μg/m(3)). CONCLUSIONS: Fine particulate pollution in Scottish homes where smoking is permitted is approximately 10 times higher than in non-smoking homes. Taken over a lifetime many non-smokers living with a smoker inhale a similar mass of PM2.5 as a non-smoker living in a heavily polluted city such as Beijing. Most non-smokers living in smoking households would experience reductions of over 70% in their daily inhaled PM2.5 intake if their home became smoke-free. The reduction is likely to be greatest for the very young and for older members of the population because they typically spend more time at home. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVE: Using data on fine particulate matter less than 2.5 μm (PM2.5) concentrations in smoking and non-smoking homes in Scotland to estimate the mass of PM2.5 inhaled by different age groups. METHODS: Data from four linked studies, with real-time measurements of PM2.5 in homes, were combined with data on typical breathing rates and time-activity patterns. Monte Carlo modelling was used to estimate daily PM2.5 intake, the percentage of total PM2.5 inhaled within the home environment and the percentage reduction in daily intake that could be achieved by switching to a smoke-free home. RESULTS: Median (IQR) PM2.5 concentrations from 93 smoking homes were 31 (10-111) μg/m(3) and 3 (2-6.5) μg/m(3) for the 17 non-smoking homes. Non-smokers living with smokers typically have average PM2.5 exposure levels more than three times higher than the WHO guidance for annual exposure to PM2.5 (10 μg/m(3)). CONCLUSIONS: Fine particulate pollution in Scottish homes where smoking is permitted is approximately 10 times higher than in non-smoking homes. Taken over a lifetime many non-smokers living with a smoker inhale a similar mass of PM2.5 as a non-smoker living in a heavily polluted city such as Beijing. Most non-smokers living in smoking households would experience reductions of over 70% in their daily inhaled PM2.5 intake if their home became smoke-free. The reduction is likely to be greatest for the very young and for older members of the population because they typically spend more time at home. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Suzanne C Hughes; John Bellettiere; Benjamin Nguyen; Sandy Liles; Neil E Klepeis; Penelope J E Quintana; Vincent Berardi; Saori Obayashi; Savannah Bradley; C Richard Hofstetter; Melbourne F Hovell Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2018-01-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Melbourne F Hovell; John Bellettiere; Sandy Liles; Benjamin Nguyen; Vincent Berardi; Christine Johnson; Georg E Matt; John Malone; Marie C Boman-Davis; Penelope J E Quintana; Saori Obayashi; Dale Chatfield; Robert Robinson; Elaine J Blumberg; Weg M Ongkeko; Neil E Klepeis; Suzanne C Hughes Journal: Tob Control Date: 2019-02-15 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Jenna Kanner; Anna Z Pollack; Shamika Ranasinghe; Danielle R Stevens; Carrie Nobles; Matthew C H Rohn; Seth Sherman; Pauline Mendola Journal: Environ Res Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 8.431
Authors: Neil E Klepeis; John Bellettiere; Suzanne C Hughes; Benjamin Nguyen; Vincent Berardi; Sandy Liles; Saori Obayashi; C Richard Hofstetter; Elaine Blumberg; Melbourne F Hovell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alan R Clough; Kristy Grant; Jan Robertson; Matthew Wrigley; Nina Nichols; Tracey Fitzgibbon Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Laura Rosen; David Zucker; Melbourne Hovell; Nili Brown; Amit Ram; Vicki Myers Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 3.390