| Full text | |
| Author(s): |
Tainio, Marko
[1]
;
de Nazelle, Audrey J.
[2]
;
Goetschi, Thomas
[3]
;
Kahlmeier, Sonja
[3]
;
Rojas-Rueda, David
[4, 5, 6]
;
Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
[4, 5, 6]
;
de Sa, Thiago Herick
[7]
;
Kelly, Paul
[8]
;
Woodcock, James
[1]
Total Authors: 9
|
| Affiliation: | [1] Univ Cambridge, Sch Clin Med, UKCRC Ctr Diet & Act Res, Inst Metab Sci, MRC Epidemiol Unit, Cambridge - England
[2] Imperial Coll London, Ctr Environm Policy, London - England
[3] Univ Zurich, Epidemiol Biostat & Prevent Inst, Phys Act & Hlth Unit, Zurich - Switzerland
[4] UPF, Barcelona - Spain
[5] Ctr Res Environm Epidemiol CREAL, Barcelona - Spain
[6] CIBERESP, Madrid - Spain
[7] Univ Sao Paulo, Sch Publ Hlth, Ctr Epidemiol Res Nutr & Hlth, Sao Paulo - Brazil
[8] Univ Edinburgh, PAHRC, Edinburgh EH8 9YL, Midlothian - Scotland
Total Affiliations: 8
|
| Document type: | Journal article |
| Source: | PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; v. 87, p. 233-236, JUN 2016. |
| Web of Science Citations: | 75 |
| Abstract | |
Active travel (cycling, walking) is beneficial for the health due to increased physical activity (PA). However, active travel may increase the intake of air pollution, leading to negative health consequences. We examined the risk-benefit balance between active travel related PA and exposure to air pollution across a range of air pollution and PA scenarios. The health effects of active travel and air pollution were estimated through changes in all-cause mortality for different levels of active travel and air pollution. Air pollution exposure was estimated through changes in background concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), ranging from 5 to 200 mu g/m3. For active travel exposure, we estimated cycling and walking from 0 up to 16 h per day, respectively. These refer to long-term average levels of active travel and PM2.5 exposure. For the global average urban background PM2.5 concentration (22 mu g/m3) benefits of PA by far outweigh risks from air pollution even under the most extreme levels of active travel. In areas with PM2.5 concentrations of 100 mu g/m3, harms would exceed benefits after 1 h 30 min of cycling per day or more than 10 h of walking per day. If the counterfactual was driving, rather than staying at home, the benefits of PA would exceed harms from air pollution up to 3 h 30 min of cycling per day. The results were sensitive to dose-response function (DRF) assumptions for PM2.5 and PA. PA benefits of active travel outweighed the harmcaused by air pollution in all but the most extreme air pollution concentrations. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. (AU) | |
| FAPESP's process: | 12/08565-4 - How are we going? The study of active commuting in Brazil |
| Grantee: | Thiago Hérick de Sá |
| Support Opportunities: | Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate |