International pulmonary specialists are interfering in the debate on limit values ​​for nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, which was launched by German colleagues. The International Lung Society Forum (FIRS) strongly supports national German standards, European standards and those of the World Health Organization (WHO), according to a statement published in the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung". This contradicts the group of German pulmonary specialists who doubted the health benefits of the current limits for particulate matter and nitrogen oxides last week.

According to the group of international specialists, pollutant pollution in the air not only damages the lungs but also other organs and worsens chronic diseases. The limits were chosen so that even for chronically ill significant negative effects on health can be excluded.

"FIRS therefore strongly supports international standards, and any clean air activity promotes good health," the statement said. FIRS is an association of various international pneumological associations. He is currently led by Professor Tobias Welte of the Hannover Medical School.

Clear contradiction

A group of lung specialists led by Dieter Köhler, the former president of the German Association for Pneumology and Respiratory Medicine (DGP), launched the debate last Wednesday by questioning the health benefits of the current limit values. They do not see any scientific justification that would justify the values ​​in force. The limits are the basis for diesel bans in some German cities.

The position of the group around Köhler was in substantial contradiction to the published by pneumological societies and professional associations statements on the relevance of air pollutants for health, it was said on Saturday by the Federal Association of Pulmonologists, sleep and respiratory Medicine (BdP).

The objections of the approximately 100 pulmonologists - from a survey of over 4,000 members of the DGP - by no means represented the opinion of the majority of German pulmonary physicians. (Read here the replica of pulmonologist Kai-Michael Beeh)

Right to low-pollution air

According to a recent online survey by the association, more than three-quarters of responding members in nitric oxide see a bad air marker, which is also representative of the other, often much more dangerous pollutants. A large proportion of the interviewees believed that a discussion on the methodology of studies should not lead to a minimization of the effects of air pollution, the BdP had said. Rather, the controversial evidence must lead to improved evidence.

Everyone must have a right to low-pollution air - after all, a voluntary waiver other than for cigarettes is not possible, said the BdP on. "It is disturbing when doctors do not clearly advocate clean air for patients and healthy people."