
Air pollution causes brain structure changes that resemble Alzheimer's disease - bookofjoe
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/well/mind/air-pollution-brain-dementia-alzheimer-memory.html
======
dfsegoat
Related / same vein:

Broccoli sprout extract contains compounds which lead to the production of
something called sulforaphane.

Sulforphane, a chemoprotective compound, has been shown to rapidly 'detoxify'
the body of airborne pollutants and other carcinogens. [1,2,3]

Briefly:

>> _In this subgroup analysis, the increases in the excretion of the
mercapturic acids of benzene, acrolein, and crotonaldehyde for the broccoli
sprout versus placebo group were +54.7% (+27.2%, +88.1%), +21.7% (+1.8%,
45.5%), and +2.0% (−13.7%, +20.4%), respectively._

1 -
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4125483/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4125483/)

2 -
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3276337/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3276337/)

3 -
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24287881](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24287881)

~~~
goda90
Out of curiosity, I looked into the best ways to get this sulforaphane.
Studies have found that it forms after plant defense systems are triggered by
damage(like an herbivore chewing), but cooking(including the blanching done to
frozen foods) cuts off that process. Some studies show that cutting up fresh
broccoli, then letting it sit 90 minutes before cooking would allow for
greater levels[0], and another showed adding powdered mustard seed to heated
broccoli also increases levels[1].

[0][https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b05913](https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b05913)
[1][https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23411305](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23411305)

~~~
synaesthesisx
This is why raw broccoli sprouts are gaining popularity - they can be added to
smoothies easily and are relatively palatable.

~~~
dfsegoat
Yep.

Get the Broccoli Sprout Extract in capsules from a vitamin provider you trust:
It has the max percentage of the desirable compounds.

Anecdotally, if you open the bottle and it smells like slightly rotten eggs,
you know it's good (this is a sulfur compound after all).

~~~
adamc
Wouldn't just eating them work better?

~~~
dfsegoat
I would prefer this (pretty easy to grow I guess?).

The advantage of the extract is that it is concentrated, so 1 gelcap is
equivalent to $X grams of raw material I would wager. Theoretically
bioavailability may be a bit better too with the extract.

------
adamch
A few weeks ago there was another story about air pollution and cognitive
decline that made it onto the frontpage. I noticed that most of the comments
on that story were people discussing air filters, respirators, etc.

I wanna get ahead of that crowd this time and say: this doesn't make much
sense as a problem for individuals to solve. We should instead be focused on
measuring the problem (where is most of the pollution coming from) and passing
legislation to drive it down.

Air pollution is localized and therefore easier to legislate around (because
the people polluting and the people suffering are in the same legislature).
Local and state-level laws can help here in a way that they can't for climate
change (which requires more international coordination).

~~~
hombre_fatal
Meanwhile, you can get air filters, respirators, etc. which work today while
legislation could be decades away.

~~~
Panino
And when there is no personal action in favor of a thing, consider how
difficult it will be to pass legislation in favor of that thing?

Imagine if all EVs, all good hybrid cars (e.g. Toyota), all vegetarianism for
environmental reasons, rooftop solar, and all other "individual actions" were
eliminated and carbon emissions doubled, and nobody seemingly cared about
climate change. Just _imagine_ how much harder it would be to get a carbon
tax. The timeline would go from someday to never.

Just as a general statement, some of the people who tell you "oh no, don't
engage in individual action!" aren't actually supportive of the legislative
approaches they suggest. They are scared that people taking a visible,
meaningful personal stand against something will move the needle in favor of
changes they oppose, in ways that online statements can't. Not everyone for
sure, but those people are there, pretending to be allies.

I've lived in 2 places with persistent (~365 days per year) bad air pollution
(France and Taiwan), and 1 place with seasonal air pollution, and the idea of
not taking individual action to protect myself is just stupid. I support
legislative approaches where sensible (or even possible), but:

> Meanwhile, you can get air filters, respirators, etc. which work today

------
abledon
"New York, I Love You But You're Bringing Me Down!"

------
equalunique
My aunt lived in a house for years which turned out to have a leaky gas pipe
in the basement. Aside from the fire hazard, she had been breathing in
gradually rising levels of fumes for many years. Recently she has been
diagnosed with Alsheimer's. Is it possible that type of gas was a contributing
factor?

------
cududa
Anecdotally, during the Bay Area fires of 2018 when the air quality was the
worse in the world, it truly felt like walking around in a half-functional
dazed fog

------
drpgq
So does it make sense for people to spend more time indoors?

~~~
goda90
It makes more sense to eliminate air pollution.

~~~
alexgmcm
Electric vehicles would eliminate a lot of noise pollution too.

As a city dweller there is nothing I long for more than complete
electrification of all transport and the death of the ICE.

~~~
simonsarris
I'd love gasoline to go away too but most particulate would still be there in
the switch because of brakes and tires:

[http://www.soliftec.com/NonExhaust%20PMs.pdf](http://www.soliftec.com/NonExhaust%20PMs.pdf)
(2016) Study highlights:

* A positive relationship exists between vehicle weight and non-exhaust emissions.

* Electric vehicles are 24% heavier than their conventional counterparts.

* Electric vehicle PM emissions are comparable to those of conventional vehicles.

* Non-exhaust sources account for 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 from traffic.

* Future policy should focus on reducing vehicle weight

Part of this is that we already spent a lot of deliberate effort on reducing
emissions from engines. As the study notes:

> Before the introduction of air quality standards, exhaust emissions used to
> be a major source of PM, especially for diesel cars (Miguel et al., 1998).
> Since then, PM emission standards for vehicle exhausts have become
> increasingly strict and now all new diesel passenger cars are fitted with a
> diesel particulate filter (DPF). Bergmann et al. (2009) found that DPFs are
> very effective at reducing PM emissions, lowering the emitted mass of PM by
> 99.3%

~~~
telchar
That paper has some flawed assumptions, I think. For one, they tie
resuspension linearly to vehicle weight, but say that it's related to the
vehicle's wake. It seems that they're confounded by the typical relationship
of weight and size (therefore wake). But electric vehicles while heavier, are
typically the same size as ICE vehicles. Thus they might break the assumption
that greater weight means greater resuspension.

The paper says that resuspension is the largest part of non-emissions
particulates, so we have lowered brake sources (because regen means less pad
wear) and lower emissions, and probably not greater resuspension. Maybe tire
wear is higher. Put those together and it seems like electric vehicles should
come out ahead, particularly if we're talking about diesel vehicles.

------
cmauniada
What is this, an article for ants?

~~~
cmauniada
I’m a serous note though, air pollution is a major problem in places like
Lahore, Peshawar etc(Pakistan).

I wonder if the best approach to regulating pollution is go from regulation
and policy change or try to come up with solutions (startups) that tackle the
problem directly...

~~~
kilotaras
There's almost zero monetary incentives for any startups.

Product focused on indoor pollution - doesn't help that much as people still
spend some time outside.

Product that "cleans" outdoor pollution - the only way to get money from that
is to sell it directly to government (maybe local). Unless you develop
something really groundbreaking it's cheaper to do regulation and policy
changes.

------
alwaysanagenda
Sample size is 998 and is only women.

The study: [https://academic.oup.com/brain/advance-article-
abstract/doi/...](https://academic.oup.com/brain/advance-article-
abstract/doi/10.1093/brain/awz348/5628036)

>"Evidence suggests exposure to particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter
<2.5 μm (PM2.5) may increase the risk for Alzheimer’s disease and related
dementias. Whether PM2.5 alters brain structure and accelerates the
preclinical neuropsychological processes remains unknown. "

I'm sure air pollution is pretty bad for you but this seems statistically
insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Great headline for New Yorkers
who need something else to be afraid of.

~~~
VC999
So you would think that men are imune to pollution.

~~~
khuey
Even if men were immune poisoning only half the population still seems like a
bad idea.

