Efectos En El Corazón

A. Health effects of particulate matter
1. Question A1
What new evidence on health effects has emerged since the review work done for the WHO Air Quality Guidelines published in 2005, particularly with regards to the
strength of the evidence on the health impacts associated with exposure to PM2.5?
Based on this new information, do the scientific conclusions given in 2005 requirerevision?

Answer:
Since the Air Quality Guidelines, Global Update 2005 were issued, many new studies from Europe and elsewhere on both short and long-term exposure to PM2.5 have been published. These studies provide considerable support for the scientific conclusions in the 2005 Guidelines and suggest additional health outcomes to be associated with PM2.5.
Among the major findings to date arethe following:
1. Additional support for the effects of short-term exposure to PM2.5 on both mortality and morbidity based on several multicity epidemiologic studies;
2. Additional support for the effects of long-term exposures to PM2.5 on mortality and morbidity based on several studies of long-term exposure conducted on large cohorts in Europe and North America;
3. An authoritative reviewof the evidence for cardiovascular effects, conducted by cardiologists, epidemiologists, toxicologists and other public health experts,
concluded that long-term exposure to PM2.5 are a cause of both cardiovascular
mortality and morbidity;
4. Significantly more insight has been gained into physiological effects and plausible biological mechanisms linking short- and long-term PM2.5 exposurewith mortality and morbidity as observed in epidemiological, clinical and toxicological studies;
5. Additional studies linking long-term exposure to PM2.5 to several new health
outcomes including atherosclerosis, adverse birth outcomes and childhood respiratory disease;
6. Emerging evidence also suggests possible links between long-term PM2.5 exposure and neurodevelopment and cognitivefunction as well as other chronic disease conditions such as diabetes.
The scientific conclusions of the 2005 WHO Guidelines about the evidence for a causal link between PM2.5 and adverse health outcomes in humans have been confirmed and strengthened and, thus, clearly remain valid. As the evidence base for the association between PM and short-term, as well as long-term, health effects has becomemuch larger and broader, it is important to update the current WHO Guidelines for PM. This is particularly important as recent long-term studies are showing associations between PM and mortality at levels well below the current annual WHO air quality guideline level for PM2.5 which is 10 µg/m3. Further discussion is also provided in section D. REVIHAAP Project: First results

2. Question A2What new health evidence is available on the role of other fractions/metrics of PM, such as smaller fractions (ultra-fines), black carbon, chemical constituents (metals, organics, in-organics, crustal material and PM of natural origin, primary/secondary) or source types (road traffic including non-tailpipe emissions,
industry, waste processing …) or exposure times (e.g. individual or repeated shortepisodes of very high exposure, 1h, 24h, yearly)?

Answer:
Since the 2005 WHO Guidelines, a considerable number of new studies have been
published providing evidence on the health effects of size fractions, components or sources of PM. Health effects are observed with short-term (e.g. hours or days) and longterm (e.g. years) exposures to airborne particles
A. Otherfractions/metrics of PM than PM2.5 or PM10
1. The 2005 Global Update Report noted that, while there was little indication that any one property of PM was responsible for the adverse health effects, toxicological studies suggested that fossil fuel and biomass combustion processes may be a significant contributor to adverse health outcomes. Since then, further information has become available to amplify the...