World leading scientists; Declining Bird numbers and Pet deaths from Air Pollution
It has been reported that healthy air quality limits have already been breached in London this year.
The World Health Organisation report published earlier last year confirmed the Health effects of air pollution on humans.
More recently Public Health England and the Committee On the Medical Effects of Air Pollution( COMEAP), have reported that previous estimates of deaths each year have been based on Particulate Matter only, and that when the effects of NO2 are taken into consideration it is likely that the number of deaths each year in the UK from air pollution is likely to be as many as 60,000 and possibly higher.
The health impacts of air pollution which include heart disease, lung disease, respiratory problems, cancer, birth defects and the tens of thousands of deaths have been widely reported in the media.
However the impacts on our environment overall have not been reported. It has not really been acknowledged that there is a significant impact on plant life and wildlife in general including animals, our pets (cats and dogs) and birdlife. Some world leading scientists have just released statements confirming these effects of air pollution.
It has been widely acknowledged that there has been a massive decline in certain species of garden bids in the UK, including sparrows and starlings
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/wildlife/11204029/Garden-birds-in-alarming-decline.html
It has previously been proven that pesticides have a significant effect on birdlife.
David Goulson, a professor at the University of Sussex, who was not involved in the new studies, said the research was convincing and ruled out likely alternative causes of bird decline. “The simplest, most obvious, explanation is that highly toxic substances that kill insects lead to declines in things that eat insects.”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/09/neonicotinoids-farmland-birds
What this shows is that if the food chain is contaminated then it has an impact on birdlife. It would therefore be reasonable to say that the toxic contamination of the food chain (plants and insects)by air pollution will have the same effect.
In fact there have been some studies which show that this is the case.
The air pollution causes both the depletion and contamination of the food chain; there is less food available and what is available is contaminated.
The direct negative health effect of air pollution on birds in an urban area has also been shown by studies. This should not be difficult to acknowledge or understand as it is widely know that cnanries were used in coal mines to provide a method of early detection of harmful gases and was used from the late 1800s up until 1986.
Birds are very vulnerable to air pollution because they have capillary lungs rather than alveolar lungs.
This EU document is about sparrows which were tested in an urban and rural environment
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/352na5_en.pdf
Professor Vyvyan Howard of the Centre for Molecular Biosciences ,University of Ulster is a leading researcher on the subject and said
‘’One particularly vulnerable group will be birds. They have a different type of lung to us and other mammals. We have an alveolar lung which expands and contracts as we breath. The entries to the tiniest parts of the airways, the alveoli, are about 80 thousandths of a millimetre across. However in birds the lung doesn’t expand but has air drawn through a dense network of capillaries that are only 4 to 7 microns across. This is very efficient under normal circumstances and saves a lot of weight compared to mammal lungs.
Very small particles cause inflammation. This in turn causes swelling of the lining of the airways. The smooth flow of air through the airways is very sensitive to the diameter if the airways. This is one reason why children, with their narrower airways are more susceptible to asthma than adults. It is not difficult to understand why birds are excuisitly sensitive to particle-induced lung problems.’’
There is also a significant effect of air pollution on animals and pets , including cats and dogs.
It is clear that their biology is very similar to humans so the well documented health effects will also apply.
It is not difficult to see that the effects of pollution on a dog could be more severe; a dog being walked along a busy road will be breathing in pollution at exhaust level so it likely to breathe more of it.
John S Reif is a leading scientist and Professor of Epidemiology Emeritus College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences and Colorado School of Public Health Colorado State University
He has recently written a summary of scientific studies detailing the effects of air pollution on animals.
‘’Studies of the effects of environmental exposures on domestic and wild animals can corroborate or inform epidemiologic studies in humans. Animals may be sensitive indicators of environmental hazards and provide an early warning system for public health intervention, as exemplified by the iconic canary in the coal mine A considerable body of evidence has accumulated regarding the effects of exposure to community air pollution on animal health. In the 1870s, fattened cattle experienced high mortality at a stock show in London’s Smithfield market associated with a dense industrial fog—a precursor to the air pollution episodes typified by the infamous London Fog of 1952, during which thousands of residents died (Holgate et al., 1999). In 1962, cases of lead poisoning in cattle and horses living in the vicinity of a smelter alerted the Minnesota state health department to conduct surveillance for air-borne lead exposure in the local human populations (Hammond and Aronson, 1964).
Considerable interest has been focused on the possibility that certain illnesses are related to living in an “urban” environment and exposure to air pollutants. Several investigators have established the dog as a comparative model for air pollution effects. Use of canine populations for studying respiratory disease has several advantages, including (1) freedom from the direct effects of cigarette smoking; (2) limited daily and lifetime geographic mobility of the dog; (3) a relatively long life span compared to laboratory animals; (4) lack of direct exposure to occupational dusts and fumes; and (5) shorter induction times or latent periods to observe health effects than would be expected in humans (Reif, 2011).
In 1939, Withers noted that carcinoma of the tonsil in a London veterinary hospital occurred almost exclusively in “townkept” dogs, as opposed to dogs from more rural and assumedly less industrialized environments. British, French, and American investigators subsequently supported this finding.
(see full statement below)
It is important that urgent action is taken to improve air quality and reduce the harm to both humans and animals. The Campaign for Air Pollution Public Inquiry www.cappi.org..uk has been set up so that it can be established why the past and current failed air quality strategies have failed so that the same mistakes are not made going forward.
The campaign has been supported by 25 MPs and Peers http://cappi.org.uk/mps-back-call-for-public-inquiry-into-air-pollution/
and by the Environmental Audit Committee. http://cappi.org.uk/letter-from-mps-and-peers-to-the-environmental-audit-committee/
It has also been supported by the Green Party
http://cappi.org.uk/air-pollution-we-need-to-force-politicians-to-take-the-issue-seriously/
Supporters are urged to sign our ePetition so that politicians take urgent action to reduce the harmful effects of pollution on people and animals
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/63333
https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=goulson-nature-nv-2014.pdf&site=411
http://www.nature.com/news/how-birds-are-used-to-monitor-pollution-1.11848
http://www.air-quality.org.uk/17.php
https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/63955/AnnalesAII256Sillanpaa.pdf?sequence=1
Does Exposure to Community Air Pollution Cause Adverse Health Effects in Animals?: Review of the Evidence
John S. Reif, D.V.M., M.Sc.(Med)
Professor of Epidemiology Emeritus
College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences and Colorado School of Public Health
Colorado State University
Colorado School of Public Health
Fort Collins, CO 80523, U.S.A.
Studies of the effects of environmental exposures on domestic and wild animals can corroborate or inform epidemiologic studies in humans. Animals may be sensitive indicators of environmental hazards and provide an early warning system for public health intervention, as exemplified by the iconic canary in the coal mine Pet animals share the environment closely with humans and are exposed to many of the same agents as their household companions. Children may be exposed through similar pathways, such as household dust. Animals suffer a similar spectrum of disease as humans and, therefore, may be sensitive indicators of environmental hazards and provide an early warning system for public health intervention (National Research Council, 1991).
A considerable body of evidence has accumulated regarding the effects of exposure to community air pollution on animal health. In the 1870s, fattened cattle experienced high mortality at a stock show in London’s Smithfield market associated with a dense industrial fog—a precursor to the air pollution episodes typified by the infamous London Fog of 1952, during which thousands of residents died (Holgate et al., 1999). In 1962, cases of lead poisoning in cattle and horses living in the vicinity of a smelter alerted the Minnesota state health department to conduct surveillance for air-borne lead exposure in the local human populations (Hammond and Aronson, 1964).
Considerable interest has been focused on the possibility that certain illnesses are related to living in an “urban” environment and exposure to air pollutants. Several investigators have established the dog as a comparative model for air pollution effects. Use of canine populations for studying respiratory disease has several advantages, including (1) freedom from the direct effects of cigarette smoking; (2) limited daily and lifetime geographic mobility of the dog; (3) a relatively long life span compared to laboratory animals; (4) lack of direct exposure to occupational dusts and fumes; and (5) shorter induction times or latent periods to observe health effects than would be expected in humans (Reif, 2011).
In 1939, Withers noted that carcinoma of the tonsil in a London veterinary hospital occurred almost exclusively in “townkept” dogs, as opposed to dogs from more rural and assumedly less industrialized environments. British, French, and American investigators subsequently supported this finding. The prevalence of tonsillar carcinoma in a hospital population in rural Washington was noted by Ragland (1967) to be significantly lower (1.0/10,000) than that reported in Paris (6.8/10,000), Philadelphia (9.1/10,000) and London (12.0/10,000). The cases occurring in Washington were reportedly referred from large industrialized cities.
University of Pennsylvania Veterinary hospital data were used to explore an urban-rural gradient for respiratory tract neoplasia in a case-control study of dogs with primary pulmonary carcinoma, carcinoma of the nasal passages and paranasal sinuses, and carcinoma of the tonsil (Reif and Cohen, 1971). The environment was divided into urban and rural segments based on atmospheric pollution data for the city of Philadelphia and the locations of major industries. No elevations in risk for an urban residence were found in the distribution of lung cancer or nasal cancer cases compared with gastrointestinal cancer controls or the total hospital population. However, a significant urban association was noted for dogs with tonsillar carcinoma in Philadelphia, 74 per cent of which resided in the urban zone compared with 61 per cent of the total population and 47 per cent of a control group with gastrointestinal neoplasia (Reif and Cohen, 1971). Similarly, an early reference to the use of pet dogs to study lung cancer risk associated with urban air pollution is attributed to V. S. Rosinov, a Russian scientist who claimed that the incidence of lung cancer among dogs in larger cities was higher than that in dogs from rural areas (Leake, 1960).
Attempts to correlate naturally occurring canine pulmonary disease with variations in ambient air quality have produced varying results. Cole et al. (1964) examined the lungs of 1227 dogs of known age and residence and found the anthracosis index (a measure of lifetime air pollution exposure) to be correlated with age and the presence of pulmonary fibrosis. Catcott et al. (1958) examined the lungs of 51 dogs from Los Angeles County, identified by age and residence, and failed to find differences between dogs from smog and smog-free areas.
In the mid 1960s, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania began exploring the effects of exposure to urban air in Philadelphia. Radiographic screening tools, including modified photo-fluorography originally used for detection of pulmonary tuberculosis, were developed for identification of canine lung cancer and other disorders (Cohen et al, 1966; Reif et al., 1970).
Reif and Cohen (1970) conducted epidemiologic studies on dogs from the Philadelphia area by means of chest radiography. They demonstrated that a relationship existed between residence in the urban area (as defined by industrial concentration and air pollution data) and the prevalence of chronic, nonspecific pulmonary disease in middle-aged and older dogs. Radiographic techniques were also used to assess the prevalence of non-specific chronic pulmonary disease (CPD) in urban and rural dogs screened at veterinary teaching hospitals in Ithaca, New York, Boston, and Philadelphia (Reif and Cohen, 1979). Radiographs obtained during routine clinical workups were graded for evidence of CPD without knowledge of the animal’s age or residence, and those with obvious disease process, such as pneumonia or neoplasia, were excluded. In Philadelphia, the prevalence of CPD was significantly higher in older dogs living in the urban area. In an analysis of 1,892 dogs from the three hospitals, the prevalence of CPD was significantly higher in older dogs from the more heavily polluted zones of Boston and Philadelphia compared with dogs from the referent area (Reif and Cohen, 1979). These early studies supported the hypothesis that an urban factor, likely related to ambient air pollution, was associated with the development of pulmonary disease in this animal model.
Approximately 30 years later, investigators studied the lungs of dogs from Mexico City and less polluted areas of the country and found structural lung changes, including mononuclear cell infiltrates, smooth muscle hyperplasia, peri-bronchiolar fibrosis, and vascular lesions, that represented an inflammatory response resulting from chronic exposure to particulates and ozone (Calderón-Garcidueñas et al., 2001). The pathologic changes described in the lungs of Mexico City dogs were consistent with the radiographic abnormalities identified in Philadelphia dogs and with lung lesions found in dogs from that population. Subsequently, these investigators studied urban dogs from Mexico City and found histologic evidence of neuroinflammation and an increased abundance of messenger ribonucleic acid from two inflammatory genes in the brains of the dogs. The findings were correlated with decrements in performance on psychometric tests in children similarly exposed to ambient air pollution (Calderón-Garcidueñas et al., 2008).
Community-based epidemiologic studies that measure incidence rates in a defined and enumerated canine population are needed to corroborate and extend the findings made in hospital populations. Such studies must incorporate state of the art measurements of exposure to fine particulate matter, as well as oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, ozone and carbon monoxide. The existing data are sufficient to conclude that exposure to community air pollution produces an inflammatory response in the lungs of dogs with chronic sequellae. However, precise quantitation of risk and extrapolation of risk estimates to contiguous human populations must be based on larger, population-based studies with well-defined outcome measures and modern methods of exposure assessment.
REFERENCES
Air Pollution and Health. Holgate ST, Koren HS, Samet JM, Maynard RL, Editors. Academic Press, 1999. p 605
Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Mora-Tiscareño A, Fordham LA, Chung CJ, García R, Osnaya N, et al. Canines as sentinel species for assessing chronic exposures to air pollutants: part 1. Respiratory pathology. Toxicol Sci 2001; 61:342-55.
Calderón-Garcidueñas L, Mora-Tiscareño A, Ontiveros E, Gómez-Garza G, Barragán-Mejía G, Broadway J, et al. Air pollution, cognitive deficits and brain abnormalities: a pilot study with children and dogs. Brain and Cogn 2008; 68:117-27.
Catcott EJ, McCammon CJ, Kotin P. Pulmonary pathology in dogs due to air pollution. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1958; 133: 331-5.
Cohen D, Reif JS, Rhodes WH. Epidemiologic studies of lung cancer in dogs. In: Severi L, editor. Lung tumours in animals. Proceedings of the Third Quadrennial International Conference on Cancer; 1965 Jun 24–29; Perugia, Italy. Perugia (Italy): University of Perugia; 1966. p. 165-80.
Cole C, Farrell R, Griesmer R. 1964. The Relationship of Animal Disease to Air Pollution. Report Ohio State Research Foundation to Dept. Health Educ. Welfare, U.S. Public Health Service.
Hammond PB, Aronson AL. Lead poisoning in cattle and horses in the vicinity of a smelter. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1964; 111: 595-611.
Leake CD. Lung cancer in dogs (letter to the editor). JAMA 1960;173:85-6.
National Research Council. Animals as sentinels of environmental health hazards. Washington: National Academy Press; 1991.
Ragland WL 3rd, Gorham JR. Tonsillar carcinoma in rural dogs. Nature 1967;214:925-6.
Reif JS. Animal Sentinels for Environmental and Public Health. Public Health Reports. 2011 Supplement 126:50-57.
Reif JS, Cohen D. Canine pulmonary disease. II. Retrospective radiographic analysis of pulmonary disease in rural and urban dogs. Arch Environ Health 1970;20:684-9.
Reif JS, Cohen D. The environmental distribution of canine respiratory tract neoplasms. Arch Environ Health 1971; 22:136-40.
Reif JS, Cohen D. Canine pulmonary disease: A spontaneous model for environmental epidemiology. In: The National Research Council. Animals as monitors of environmental pollutants. Washington: National Academy of Sciences; 1979. p. 241-50.
Reif JS, Rhodes WH, Cohen D. Canine pulmonary disease and the urban environment. I. The validity of radiographic examination for estimating the prevalence of pulmonary disease. Arch Environ Health 1970;20:676-83.
Withers FW: Squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil in the dog. J Pathol Bact 49:1429-1432, 1939.