- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
Re: $$$Million Dollar FAP Minister: Be Fair, Refer to 24hr PSI, not 3hr!
[h=2]Responding to Ng Eng Heng’s nonsense of only referring to 24hr
PSI[/h]
June 22nd, 2013 |
Author: Contributions
Minister Ng Eng Hen
Defence Minister and Chairman of the Haze Inter-Ministerial Committee Ng Eng
Hen on Friday urged the public to refer to the 24-hour Pollutant Standards Index
(PSI) reading rather than the three-hour reading. He said that most studies on
the exposure to pollutants are based on 24-hour measurements, and explained that
was why the government’s guidelines are also based on 24-hour measurements.
This is dangerous nonsense. Does one whose house is burning around him make a
decision whether to leave the premises based on 24-hour average temperature?
Just as that person would be burned to death in minutes if he decided to stay in
a burning building, similarly, serious lung damage could be sustained by one
breathing in high PSI air for short durations like 15 minutes.
Has the relatively recent smoke grenade fatality involving a young NSF not
taught us that fine particulate matter in air can be harmful in short intense
exposure? Or has the poor young man been forgotten? Granted, that tragic case is
not identical, but there are important similarities.
(The PAP Government should be reminded of the basic fact that if a 3-hour
average PSI reading is, for instance, 300, then there must have been
10/20-minute average PSI readings in the relevant 3-hour time span above 300.
Possibly significantly above 300.)
It is certainly true that the health impacts of air pollutants are determined
both by the concentration and also the duration of exposure. But what the PAP
Government is saying is truly incredible, and incredible claims have to be
backed up by evidence.
If the government can put forth credible evidence that exposures of 10 to 20
minutes, common for simple necessary actions like walking to the bus stop and
waiting for the bus, to PSI levels of over 200 has negligible ill-effects. We
should take note and relax a little. But in the absence of such credible
evidence, it is only safe and reasonable to assume that such exposure should be
actively avoided because such exposures may cause complications; Complications
that may be much more severe in some than others.
The PAP Government should not misinform Singaporeans about the haze threat.
It is dangerous and does Singaporeans a huge disservice.
.
Jeremy Chen
* Jeremy is currently a PhD student at the Department of Decision
Sciences at NUS Business School. Jeremy believes in the possibility of a
beautiful synthesis of “social justice” and “the free market”. He also hopes for
less politicking and more policy discussion in the political arena. He blogs at
http://jeremy-chen.org.
.
Editor’s note: Perhaps the Minister of Defence, Dr Ng,
can assure Singaporeans that everything is alright by doing IPPT including the
2.4km run himself when the 3hr PSI is above 200?
[h=2]Responding to Ng Eng Heng’s nonsense of only referring to 24hr
PSI[/h]
Minister Ng Eng Hen
Defence Minister and Chairman of the Haze Inter-Ministerial Committee Ng Eng
Hen on Friday urged the public to refer to the 24-hour Pollutant Standards Index
(PSI) reading rather than the three-hour reading. He said that most studies on
the exposure to pollutants are based on 24-hour measurements, and explained that
was why the government’s guidelines are also based on 24-hour measurements.
This is dangerous nonsense. Does one whose house is burning around him make a
decision whether to leave the premises based on 24-hour average temperature?
Just as that person would be burned to death in minutes if he decided to stay in
a burning building, similarly, serious lung damage could be sustained by one
breathing in high PSI air for short durations like 15 minutes.
Has the relatively recent smoke grenade fatality involving a young NSF not
taught us that fine particulate matter in air can be harmful in short intense
exposure? Or has the poor young man been forgotten? Granted, that tragic case is
not identical, but there are important similarities.
(The PAP Government should be reminded of the basic fact that if a 3-hour
average PSI reading is, for instance, 300, then there must have been
10/20-minute average PSI readings in the relevant 3-hour time span above 300.
Possibly significantly above 300.)
It is certainly true that the health impacts of air pollutants are determined
both by the concentration and also the duration of exposure. But what the PAP
Government is saying is truly incredible, and incredible claims have to be
backed up by evidence.
If the government can put forth credible evidence that exposures of 10 to 20
minutes, common for simple necessary actions like walking to the bus stop and
waiting for the bus, to PSI levels of over 200 has negligible ill-effects. We
should take note and relax a little. But in the absence of such credible
evidence, it is only safe and reasonable to assume that such exposure should be
actively avoided because such exposures may cause complications; Complications
that may be much more severe in some than others.
The PAP Government should not misinform Singaporeans about the haze threat.
It is dangerous and does Singaporeans a huge disservice.
.
Jeremy Chen
* Jeremy is currently a PhD student at the Department of Decision
Sciences at NUS Business School. Jeremy believes in the possibility of a
beautiful synthesis of “social justice” and “the free market”. He also hopes for
less politicking and more policy discussion in the political arena. He blogs at
http://jeremy-chen.org.
.
Editor’s note: Perhaps the Minister of Defence, Dr Ng,
can assure Singaporeans that everything is alright by doing IPPT including the
2.4km run himself when the 3hr PSI is above 200?