> This isn’t a controversial result in the literature, it’s more evidence for what we already know —- air pollution is very bad.
It is certainly controversial for individuals whose way of life (see non-electric car-centric society) is being questioned by this science. Just look at some of the cynic answers in this thread pretending that air pollution is not bad
Just because air pollution is bad, doesn’t mean it is bad in this way. It could just as easily be that some other lifestyle thing is causing dementia AND leading to living in areas with worse pm2.5.
Especially since pm2.5 tends to be higher in areas with higher population densities, near roads, industrial areas, etc.
Hell, maybe the underlying major risk factor is actually time spent in the car. Or repeated viral exposures of a specific type. Or a specific type of air pollution.
Either way, it’s not like everyone is going to be moving out of high pm2.5 areas anytime soon, or that we’ll be able to just solve the sources of pollution right now even if it is the cause.
Wildfires are already illegal in California. As is producing a lot of noxious smoke! They even have an entire (rather large) government division (CALFIRE) responsible for stopping them.
For some reason, nature DGAF.
Or do you have some other policy proposal? Banning lightning or fire perhaps? Making trees illegal?
It is certainly controversial for individuals whose way of life (see non-electric car-centric society) is being questioned by this science. Just look at some of the cynic answers in this thread pretending that air pollution is not bad