Of course not, it was a hyperbole.
Not Your Imagination: HK Air Pollution Going Up EXPONENTIALLY--Chart
- Thread starter thanka2
- Start date
Of course not, it was a hyperbole.
nicolejoy
Registered User
As a chemist, I do think that the pollution levels, while they ARE high, are not as "awful" as a lot of people make them out to be. Yes it's not ideal, but this whole "the pollution kills x people?" I think it's baloney. I'm with the government on this one - look at the FACTS, Hong Kong has a high life expectancy - ie, it's NOT going to shorten your life by living here. Hong Kong does NOT have a higher rate of respiratory diseases that are associated with airborne particles such as asthma. I don't know the comparison between Hong Kong and every other country, but I do know for sure that it is BETTER than Australia. So I think that it is a FACT that the air here is BETTER for you than the air in Australia.
There's so much hogwash and scare tactics going around these days - and while I think that the pollution levels are not ideal and I too would love to see them go down, I don't think it's anything to freak out about and I think it's ludicrous to make it out to be worse than what it is. As a chemist, I was exposed to a lot worse things and at higher concentrations on a daily basis - and it's just "acceptable risk". The relatively small amounts in the environment honestly don't bother me.
There's so much hogwash and scare tactics going around these days - and while I think that the pollution levels are not ideal and I too would love to see them go down, I don't think it's anything to freak out about and I think it's ludicrous to make it out to be worse than what it is. As a chemist, I was exposed to a lot worse things and at higher concentrations on a daily basis - and it's just "acceptable risk". The relatively small amounts in the environment honestly don't bother me.
He he he. My thoughts exactly when I read that comment. Also saying, "The air is so thick you can chew it" is probably not very "scientifically true" but it does very well describe HK air on some days, I think.
Hmmm...I wonder what the scientists over at Chinese University who track the numbers of deaths due to poor air quality would have to say.
I also wonder about quality of life as 70% of people in this city, when polled said they can't stand the pollution levels.
I have so many guesses about longevity--better diet, more holistic medicine/belief in taking care of one's body, access to medical care, fewer deaths to traffic accidents because of public transportation, low crime rate, better social bonds as the older generation are taken care of by the younger, the fact that the older generation wasn't exposed to the pollution levels we have today or maybe the fact that a lot of HK people can afford to travel and get out of HK on a regular basis (or own homes in other countries such as Canada). Who knows?
I think if we're just content with the status quo it shows two things:
1. We're not invested in HK for the long-run (we expats can leave this city at any time and often do)
2. We're not looking at the future (go live in a major Mainland city for a year and you can see where HK is going)
It may not be "that bad" (by some peoples' standards today) but without regulation of simple things like the quality of fuel boats can use or an international standard of rating pollution levels HK will continue to go down the tubes--I've witnessed it with my own eyes over the past 9 years. I don't think the charts and readings (such as the HK Observatory--for those who "agree with the government on this one") lie when they show an enormous increase in air pollution in this city. When is enough enough? It's just a sad, sad thing that many days tourists can't even see beautiful Victoria harbor because of the smog. We not only lose our health, HK loses it's charm and competitiveness and that makes me sad. This problem has been called a "cancer" on the city by officials in the General Chamber of commerce.
I am not a chemist and therefore did not sign up for the "occupational hazard" of inhaling carcinogens in my line of employment. I guess the next time I'm wheezing and coughing and I hear my son doing the same or I'm rushed to hospital because of the pollution, I'll just tell myself, "it's not awful."
I have so many guesses about longevity--better diet, more holistic medicine/belief in taking care of one's body, access to medical care, fewer deaths to traffic accidents because of public transportation, low crime rate, better social bonds as the older generation are taken care of by the younger, the fact that the older generation wasn't exposed to the pollution levels we have today or maybe the fact that a lot of HK people can afford to travel and get out of HK on a regular basis (or own homes in other countries such as Canada). Who knows?
I think if we're just content with the status quo it shows two things:
1. We're not invested in HK for the long-run (we expats can leave this city at any time and often do)
2. We're not looking at the future (go live in a major Mainland city for a year and you can see where HK is going)
It may not be "that bad" (by some peoples' standards today) but without regulation of simple things like the quality of fuel boats can use or an international standard of rating pollution levels HK will continue to go down the tubes--I've witnessed it with my own eyes over the past 9 years. I don't think the charts and readings (such as the HK Observatory--for those who "agree with the government on this one") lie when they show an enormous increase in air pollution in this city. When is enough enough? It's just a sad, sad thing that many days tourists can't even see beautiful Victoria harbor because of the smog. We not only lose our health, HK loses it's charm and competitiveness and that makes me sad. This problem has been called a "cancer" on the city by officials in the General Chamber of commerce.
I am not a chemist and therefore did not sign up for the "occupational hazard" of inhaling carcinogens in my line of employment. I guess the next time I'm wheezing and coughing and I hear my son doing the same or I'm rushed to hospital because of the pollution, I'll just tell myself, "it's not awful."
shuchisingh
Registered User
Thanka2 your concerns on pollution are well taken but why get personal ?
Posted via Mobile Device
Posted via Mobile Device
No intent to be personal but the remarks above strike me as brushing off the health concerns (which are grounded in actual evidence) that myself and others have for ours and our childrens' health as:
And I am also floored a bit because the poster who posted the above words seems to me to be experiencing a completely different air quality than I do on a daily basis. But we do live in different parts of HK and she does get a bit more sea breeze than we do so maybe that is a factor.
To me, the air pollution is about my experience not numbers anyway, although the numbers clearly indicate that it is of concern. Of course, everyone will have their own ideas about what is acceptable and to some the
It's all a bit shocking but as everyone on this forum knows (or should by now) I tend to think for myself and am quite vocal about my opinions even though often I am in the minority.
And to add--I see nothing too personal in the posts I've made as I have used only the words other posters have used. In a true debate, no one would bat an eyelash at anything I've posted. My apologies if anyone has truly been offended.
Finally, if you're referring to the comment about "I'm a chemist"--the original poster offered that as an argument proving that Hong Kong air standards are acceptable. However, the argument doesn't seem very relevant to people like me who choose to not be around chemical gases as part of our livelihood and in turn accept the inherent risks that come with that type of work. She offered that as evidence of the authority of her statements which is all well and good but again, I think the argument is quite weak. She brought it up for discussion.
Last edited:
nicolejoy
Registered User
I'm not saying that I think that the pollution level is acceptable, I said that I'm all for the pollution levels being reduced. What I AM saying is that many of the health concerns about the pollution levels are grossly exaggerated. And I brought up my educational background since it is relevant to this topic, I think.
Anyways - I know that we will never agree on this issue, but it's not fair to have a completely one-sided discussion about an issue like this, so I'm just saying my opinion for "the other side". It's not a personal attack, it's just my opinion - and I hoped to add another point of view to this topic, that's all
I didn't "bat an eyelid" about any of your posts, I know we just can agree to disagree.
Anyways - I know that we will never agree on this issue, but it's not fair to have a completely one-sided discussion about an issue like this, so I'm just saying my opinion for "the other side". It's not a personal attack, it's just my opinion - and I hoped to add another point of view to this topic, that's all
I didn't "bat an eyelid" about any of your posts, I know we just can agree to disagree.I'm living in Heng Fa Chuen which is consider in Chai Wan, one station away from Shau Kei Wan. If you let us know, i will get you a beer, not that you can drink it if you choose to breastfeed, which i think you will.
No, i'm not pregnant, i had my no. 1 last year. Have plans for no. 2 soon before i hit the high risk category. Haha.