Scientists issue critical warning after linking common appliance to major health risk: 'The problem is far worse than we thought'
For the first time, researchers are now able to link premature deaths to gas stove pollution. While previous studies have identified the dangers of gas stoves, this groundbreaking review has tied thousands of early deaths to the popular stoves.
A new study estimates that 40,000 deaths in Europe are a result of gas stove pollution, according to Euronews.
Researchers at the University of Jaume I's School of Health Sciences in Spain analyzed dozens of health studies examining how nitrogen dioxide causes asthma and premature deaths. They then scaled up nitrogen dioxide measurements in and outside homes across multiple European countries to establish a clear image of the pollution from gas cookers.
While research from the past 50 years has identified the health risks of nitrogen dioxide pollution, the new findings paint a much darker reality than expected.
"The extent of the problem is far worse than we thought, with our modeling suggesting that the average home across half of Europe breaks WHO limits," lead author of the new study, Dr. Juana Maria Delgado-Saborit, told Euronews. "Outdoor air pollution lays the foundation for those breaches, but it is gas cookers that push homes into the danger zone."
This is the first scientific review to have the data necessary to pinpoint premature deaths due to gas stove pollution. Although the study's findings tie 40,000 premature deaths to nitrogen dioxide exposure, it's important to note that the researchers believe this number to be much higher.
Gas stoves release harmful pollutants that can cause severe health risks as well as environmental damage. On top of exacerbating asthma, the pollutants from gas stoves also exacerbate rising global temperatures.
To avoid indoor pollution from gas cookers, homeowners across the globe are switching to induction stovetops. Unlike gas stoves, induction stoves release no harmful pollutants into the air, keeping you and your family safe.
Induction stoves are also more efficient, saving you energy and money down the line. For homeowners looking to make the switch, induction stoves from brands like Copper offer an easy and affordable solution for avoiding the dangers of gas stoves. What's more, under the Inflation Reduction Act, homeowners can receive up to 30% off the cost of an induction range.
Do you think gas stoves should be banned nationwide?
No way
Let each state decide
I'm not sure
Definitely
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
After switching to an induction stove, you'll notice that you won't spend as much time cooking and cleaning your kitchen since induction stoves cook faster and are easier to maintain than gas stoves.
Moving forward, it's best to act sooner rather than later when it comes to making eco-friendly upgrades to your home. President Donald Trump has stated he intends to remove these subsidies, though this would ultimately require an act of Congress. As a result, upgrading now could be the difference between saving thousands of dollars down the line.
Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
No drug price pledges in talks with US government, Pfizer CEO says
STORY: Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said Monday that he and other drug companies met with the Trump administration to discuss lowering U.S. drug prices but no commitments have been made. He made the comments at a Goldman Sachs healthcare conference. Last month President Trump issued an executive order directing drugmakers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay. According to the order, the administration was to set "Most Favored Nation" price targets within 30 days. The Department of Health and Human Services has said it expects drugmakers in the U.S. to set prices for their products at the lowest price paid by other high-income countries. Bourla said he didn't know what the companies would hear in 30 days and added the meetings with the administration so far were cordial but (quote) "not digging into the substance." It is unclear what mechanism the U.S. government will use to lower drug prices - analysts and legal experts have said the policy will be difficult to implement. Bourla said he is hopeful that, given U.S. pressure on European countries to pay more, prices there could increase. He said that if the U.S. resorts to price controls, Pfizer could consider not making drugs available for government reimbursement in some countries if prices don't increase there. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
321 Launch: Space news you may have missed over the past week (June 9)
A loud, sustained rumble shook the Space Coast early Tuesday, June 2 — and it wasn't thunder. The loud rumble was a SpaceX rocket taking off on the latest Starlink delivery mission. The liftoff occurred on time at 12:43 a.m. from Cape Canaveral Launch Complex 40, despite bad weather lingering off shore. Read the full story here. Dozens of NASA's missions to explore the cosmos could be in jeopardy under a budget proposal from the White House. President Donald Trump's administration, which released an initial budget proposal May 2 for the U.S. space agency, dropped more details Friday, May 30, about just which NASA programs it looks to cancel. All told, the budget request for the next fiscal year proposes slashing NASA funding by nearly 25% – from $24.8 billion to $18.8 billion – mostly by eliminating a significant portion of the agency's science portfolio. Read the full story here. A week away from their private mission to the International Space Station, four astronauts talked to the media from quarantine on June 3, showing off a plush toy they will be bringing with them into space. It's a swan named Joy, which has special significance to this Axiom crew, made up of astronauts from the United States, India, Poland and Hungary. Read the full story here. It's safe to say that most of us have seen lightning here on Earth plenty of times – some of us have even been struck by it. But the natural phenomenon is one all but a few select individuals will ever have the chance to see from the vantage of 250 miles in orbit. Fortunately, a few astronauts over the years have been more than willing to generously share a glimpse of crashing lightning as seen from outer space. Read the full story here. Much has changed in 15 years, however one thing remains the same: SpaceX still routinely launches Falcon 9 rockets from Cape Canaveral. As new rockets and space companies arrive on the scene, this workhorse of a rocket, the Falcon 9, remains the most common rocket launched from Florida launch pads. It debuted 15 years ago this week, and has changed not only the launch cadence on the Space Coast but the entire industry. Read the full story here. Look for SpaceX to launch another SiriusXM geostationary communications satellite into orbit the night of Friday, June 6, from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. SiriusXM reported about 33 million subscribers and $1.6 billion in total revenue during the first quarter of the year, per an earnings release. The satellite radio company's podcast business continued to grow, racking up nearly 1 billion downloads and 70 million monthly podcast listeners. Read the full story here. The next group of international astronauts are preparing to head up into outer space. Axiom Space, a company headquartered in Houston, Texas, is set to send four spacefarers up to the International Space Station on a private two-week research mission. The Axiom Mission 4, also known as Ax-4, is the latest in a series of human spaceflights in partnership with both NASA and SpaceX. Read the full story here. One year ago, two experienced NASA astronauts boarded an experimental Boeing spacecraft known as the Starliner for a short voyage to orbit and back. If you followed the Starliner saga as a few days stretched into months, you likely remember how this story ends. Read the full story here. The first human spaceflight for Boeing's Starliner made headlines for all the wrong reasons. But one year after its launch, it appears neither Boeing nor NASA have given up the spacecraft. On June 5, 2024, the Starliner got off the ground from Florida with two experienced NASA astronauts aboard for what was to be a brief trip to the International Space Station. Days then stretched into months after mission engineers noticed that the vehicle had encountered a slew of mechanical issues during its orbital voyage. Read the full story here. Launch recap: Scroll down to review live updates from the Saturday, June 7, liftoff of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Cape Canaveral on the SiriusXM SXM-10 mission. Read the full story here. With President Donald Trump and SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk exchanging barbs during a June 5 social media spat, potential space-industry threats emerged — cancellation of Musk's federal contracts and decommissioning SpaceX Dragon spacecraft — that could pack profound impacts for Florida's Space Coast. That said, Don Platt, director of the Florida Institute of Technology's Spaceport Education Center in Titusville, believes it is best to "take it all with a grain of salt." He noted that SpaceX and the U.S. government depend heavily on each other. Read the full story here. After hours of evening lightning delays and towering clouds, SpaceX crews waited until after midnight to launch SiriusXM's latest geostationary satellite from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The Falcon 9 rocket propelled off the pad at 12:54 a.m. Saturday, June 7, and delivered the third-generation, Maxar Space Systems-manufactured SXM-10 satellite into orbit. Read the full story here. The notion of launching rockets into space from the decks of seafaring ships leaves a lot of people scratching their heads and wondering, "Why?" acknowledges Tom Marotta, CEO and founder of The Spaceport Company. But amid record-breaking launch demand, Marotta noted that U.S. commercial rocket companies have limited locations to send up rockets, such as Florida's Space Coast and Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. Conversely, aircraft pilots can take flight from more than 20,000 airports and airfields across the nation. Read the full story here. Get ready for a launch day treat. Plans right now call for a crewed launch, followed by a second launch in a rare launch double-header. Throw in a sonic boom and June 10 could be an extra special space day on the Space Coast. Plans could easily change but if all goes on schedule then the Axiom Mission 4 Crew will launch from pad 39A at NASA's Kennedy Space Center at 8:22 a.m. June 10. The mission marks a return to spaceflight for three countries who have astronauts onboard and a return to the International Space Station for one of NASA's most well-traveled former astronauts. Read the full story here. For the latest news from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and NASA's Kennedy Space Center, visit Another easy way: Click here to sign up for our weekly Space newsletter. Rick Neale is a Space Reporter at FLORIDA TODAY. Contact Neale at Rneale@ Twitter/X: @RickNeale1 Space is important to us and that's why we're working to bring you top coverage of the industry and Florida launches. Journalism like this takes time and resources. Please support it with a subscription here. This article originally appeared on Florida Today: 321 Launch: Space news you may have missed over the past week (June 9)
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: How Much More Positive Head Start Evidence Do We Need to Save It?
The Trump administration's first four months have been rough on U.S. children. They certainly don't deserve the punishment. From polarized and destabilizing politics to a global pandemic, increasing environmental pressures from climate change (and more), this cohort of children is coming of age in a particularly difficult moment. And yet, we have reached what is perhaps a zenith in Trump-era politics of disinvesting in children and families. The administration's response to America's youth crisis has been stunningly consistent: again and again, it has balanced occasional, vague promises to do something constructive to address child care costs or infertility challenges on the one hand with real and stunningly concrete attacks on children's well-being on the other. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Perhaps the most direct and comprehensive assault on children is coming through the administration's war on Head Start. At $12.3 billion last year, it's the federal government's largest-single investment in early learning, and it serves almost 800,000 children and families per year. Over its 60 years, Head Start has provided high-quality early learning as well as connecting around 40 million children and their families to comprehensive support services like health and dental care, nutrition and housing assistance. During the 2024 campaign, Donald Trump echoed the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 playbook in calling for Head Start's elimination. This was hardly novel: though Head Start has long enjoyed bipartisan support, a subset of conservative researchers, activists and politicians have spent decades attacking the program. While the administration's chaotic first 100 days decimated portions of the federal government supporting health and well-being, its attacks on Head Start have been uniquely unpredictable. In January, as Elon Musk and his underlings at the Department of Government Efficiency hacked away at the federal civil service, Head Start providers across the country reported that they were unable to access their normally scheduled federal payments. This posed a particular challenge for Head Start center directors navigating the tight margins that define the early education market; hundreds of early care and learning centers warned that they were at risk of closure. Related Later in the spring, the administration abruptly pulled funding from regional Head Start centers that offer resources, support and oversight for Head Start providers. Several weeks ago, it appeared that the administration was preparing to act more decisively to abandon U.S. kids and families who depend on Head Start. On April 17, the Associated Press reported on leaked documents indicating that the Trump administration would erase Head Start funding in its forthcoming budget proposal. Once this hit the news, Head Start supporters mobilized to save the program, and the administration reversed course. While it appears that the administration isn't (yet) ready to deliver on this promised assault on children's well-being, it's worth reminding ourselves just what a stunning mistake it would be to reduce this particular investment in U.S. kids and families. Related Head Start has been studied many times, and the results are broadly positive. Research on it — and other early education programs — finds a relatively consistent pattern: Early education programs are reliably good for families and at preparing kids for kindergarten There's some waning of positive academic impacts as kids go through K-12 But the long-term impacts of early ed investments are generally positive. First, Head Start appears to be particularly effective at helping children from historically marginalized communities. Perhaps most importantly in the present political context, early education programs tend to promote better child development outcomes that create cost savings for school budgets. This mostly results from pre-K programs like Head Start reducing the likelihood that children will later require special education services or need to repeat a grade. For instance, economist Tim Bartik notes that studies show possible special education cost-savings of '23 to 86 percent.' Meanwhile, if a child repeats second (or any) grade, the public pays an additional year of per-pupil funding, and it also delays their entry into the workforce. As such, pre-K's ability to lower grade retention and keep students on track for college and career is a particularly efficient return on early education investments. Finally, early education programs like Head Start are a boon for working families because they help parents get back to work sooner after having a child. Most encouraging of all, Head Start appears to create some long-term positive effects. In 2022, researchers at the University of Notre Dame and Texas A&M found that the children of Head Start participants garnered benefits like higher high school graduation and college attainment rates, lower rates of teen pregnancy and reduced rates of interaction with the criminal justice system. For instance, critics often point to the federal Head Start Impact Study, which gathered data on programs in the early 2000s. It largely found that Head Start had positive initial effects on children's development, but that these effects 'faded out' as kids worked their way into the K–12 education system. But problems with the study's data prompted a field reassessment of its findings in the 2010s, with most researchers concluding that it meaningfully underestimated Head Start's benefits to children. This begs some critical questions about how the public should measure 'success' for Head Start. Begin here: nearly every study of nearly every early education investment shows that these programs are effective at getting kids ready for K–12 schooling. Put simply, pre-K appears to be good at getting kids 'pre'-pared for K(indergarten). Related The trouble is, political rhetoric about early education investments has sometimes presented them as an invulnerable 'inoculation' against all challenges that children may face later in life. This is the wrong way to think about whether early education investments 'work,' because it sets an impossible bar for success. Head Start — or pre-K programs more generally — cannot wholly blunt poverty, poor health or the impacts of low-quality K–12 classrooms. Indeed, even less rosy findings, like those in a recent study of Tennessee's public pre-K program, indicate a positive path forward for public early education investments. Initial studies of the program garnered headlines. While Tennessee pre-K attendees were generally more ready for kindergarten than their peers who did not attend the program, pre-K attendees scored worse on a range of metrics by the end of elementary school. This is concerning! But a more recent analysis of Tennessee's data found that pre-K's benefits were 'most likely to persist until 3rd grade among those students who went on to attend high quality schooling environments and were taught by highly effective teachers.' That is, Tennessee's pre-K programs succeeded at preparing children for kindergarten, and kids who went from those programs into higher-quality elementary classrooms continued to do better. In other words, if Head Start and other pre-K programs are measured as a one-time public investment that will solve all systemic inequities in American schools and society, they will inevitably appear to fail. But if they are measured against their ability to prepare children for elementary schools, it is clear that they are a success. Furthermore, this fairer definition of Head Start's effectiveness would allow policymakers to focus their attention on the necessary work of investing and improving K–12 schools so that they bolster children and families beyond the early years.
