Science When science showed in the 1970s that gas stoves produced harmful indoor air pollution, the industry reached for tobacco’s PR playbook - We totally didn't just make up the idea that gas stoves are harmful

Jonathan Levy
Professor and Chair, Department of Environmental Health, Boston University
Published: November 3, 2023 9.01am EDT

a97ee7e71eb4cccebdddcc0e6ded63ae.jpg
Gas stoves without adequate ventilation can produce harmful concentrations of nitrogen dioxide. Sjoerd van der Wal/Getty Images

In 1976, beloved chef, cookbook author, and television personality Julia Child returned to WGBH-TV’s studios in Boston for a new cooking show, Julia Child & Company, following her hit series The French Chef. Viewers probably didn’t know that Child’s new and improved kitchen studio, outfitted with gas stoves, was paid for by the American Gas Association.

While this may seem like any corporate sponsorship, we now know it was a part of a calculated campaign by gas industry executives to increase the use of gas stoves across the United States. And stoves weren’t the only objective. The gas industry wanted to grow its residential market, and homes that used gas for cooking were likely also to use it for heat and hot water.

The industry’s efforts went well beyond careful product placement, according to new research from the nonprofit Climate Investigations Center, which analyzes corporate efforts to undermine climate science and slow the ongoing transition away from fossil fuels. As the center’s study and a National Public Radio investigation show, when evidence emerged in the early 1970s about the health effects of indoor nitrogen dioxide exposure from gas stove use, the American Gas Association launched a campaign designed to manufacture doubt about the existing science.

As a researcher who has studied air pollution for many years—including gas stoves’ contribution to indoor air pollution and health effects—I am not naïve about the strategies that some industries use to avoid or delay regulations. But I was surprised to learn that the multipronged strategy related to gas stoves directly mirrored tactics that the tobacco industry used to undermine and distort scientific evidence of health risks associated with smoking starting in the 1950s.

The gas industry is defending natural gas stoves, which are under fire for their health effects and their contribution to climate change.

Manufacturing controversy​

The gas industry relied on Hill & Knowlton, the same public relations company that masterminded the tobacco industry’s playbook for responding to research linking smoking to lung cancer. Hill & Knowlton’s tactics included sponsoring research that would counter findings about gas stoves published in the scientific literature, emphasizing uncertainty in these findings to construct artificial controversy and engaging in aggressive public relations efforts.

For example, the gas industry obtained and reanalyzed the data from an EPA study on Long Island that showed more respiratory problems in homes with gas stoves. Their reanalysis concluded that there were no significant differences in respiratory outcomes.

The industry also funded its own health studies in the early 1970s, which confirmed large differences in nitrogen dioxide exposures but did not show significant differences in respiratory outcomes. These findings were documented in publications where industry funding was not disclosed. These conclusions were amplified in numerous meetings and conferences and ultimately influenced major governmental reports summarizing the state of the literature.

This campaign was remarkable, since the basics of how gas stoves affected indoor air pollution and respiratory health were straightforward and well-established at the time. Burning fuel, including natural gas, generates nitrogen oxides: The air in Earth’s atmosphere is about 78 percent nitrogen and 21 percent oxygen, and these gases react at high temperatures.

Nitrogen dioxide is known to adversely affect respiratory health. Inhaling it causes respiratory irritation and can worsen diseases such as asthma. This is a key reason why the US Environmental Protection Agency established an outdoor air quality standard for nitrogen dioxide in 1971.

No such standards exist for indoor air, but as the EPA now acknowledges, nitrogen dioxide exposure indoors is also harmful.

asthma.png
More than 27 million people in the U.S. have asthma, including about 4.5 million children under age 18. Non-Hispanic Black children are two times more likely to have asthma compared with non-Hispanic white children
EPA

How harmful is indoor exposure?​

The key question is whether nitrogen dioxide exposure related to gas stoves is large enough to lead to health concerns. While levels vary across homes, scientific research shows that the simple answer is yes—especially in smaller homes and when ventilation is inadequate.

This has been known for a long time. For example, a 1998 study that I co-authored showed that the presence of gas stoves was the strongest predictor of personal exposure to nitrogen dioxide. And work dating back to the 1970s showed that indoor nitrogen dioxide levels in the presence of gas stoves could be far higher than outdoor levels. Depending on ventilation levels, concentrations could reach levels known to contribute to health risks.

Despite this evidence, the gas industry’s campaign was largely successful. Industry-funded studies successfully muddied the waters, as I have seen over the course of my research career, and stalled further federal investigations or regulations addressing gas stove safety.

This issue took on new life at the end of 2022, when researchers published a new study estimating that 12.7 percent of US cases of childhood asthma—about one case in eight—were attributable to gas stoves. The industry continues to cast doubt on gas stoves’ contribution to health effects and fund pro-gas stove media campaigns.

1699111641131.png
Tweet (Archive)

A concern for climate and health​

Residential gas use is also controversial today because it slows the ongoing shift toward renewable energy, at a time when the impacts of climate change are becoming alarmingly clear. Some cities have already moved or are considering steps to ban gas stoves in new construction and shift toward electrifying buildings.

As communities wrestle with these questions, regulators, politicians and consumers need accurate information about the risks of gas stoves and other products in homes. There is room for vigorous debate that considers a range of evidence, but I believe that everyone has a right to know where that evidence comes from.

The commercial interests of many industries, including alcohol, tobacco and fossil fuels, aren’t always compatible with the public interest or human health. In my view, exposing the tactics that vested interests use to manipulate the public can make consumers and regulators savvier and help deter other industries from using their playbook.

Disclosure statement​

Jonathan Levy has received funding from the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Health Effects Institute for studies on the contribution of outdoor and indoor sources to air pollution levels in homes.

Partners​

1699111970552.png
Boston University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation US.

Source (Archive)
 
Burning anything will pollute the air, it just isn't the government's business if my stove is being powered by gas, kerosene, propane or used motor oil.
I propose to create a stove that's powered by weed, then we can reap the benefits of the pollution it creates.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Jimjamflimflam
Do people not simply open windows and/or install vents when using gas stoves? I thought it was standard for any modern home to have a well-ventilated kitchen. It's not even a new idea even.
Y peepoe don't smoke up dey livin room
 
It really has been fascinating, to watch this narrative develop in real time. They went from "we're not banning gas stoves" to "banning gas stoves is good for you, actually" in a little over five months.
And watch them going after electric stoves and wood stoves,....
 
"Nobody wants to take your gas stoves! And it's good that they do!"

The comparison to Big Tobacco is just another callback to one of their triumphs against actual malfeasance back in the 1960s. Everything for liberals is about LARPing as FDR.

There was a book published in recent years called Merchants of Doubt, which claims that anyone who dissents from The Experts™️ is just a shill for Big Bad Industry.

This is a common Marxist tactic: when you cannot refute your opponent's arguments on their own merits, attack them as a self-interested apologist for the "oppressor" class.

It's also reflective of the greater Leftist ethos, that they can never be wrong, only sabotaged by wrongthinkers. Nothing is ever their fault, things just happen to them.

No wonder there's a positive correlation between Leftism and Dark Triad traits.
Just jumping to the conclusion paragraphs...
...
The theoretical approach advanced here bore some fruit, in that the association between Machiavellianism and socio-religious conservatism was consistent with the theoretical stance taken. The theoretical standpoint taken here was also shown to be consistent with findings from other studies, albeit ones that were not designed with this theoretical approach in mind. However, the lack of generalization to the other dark traits and a finding of no association between economic liberalism and the dark traits suggest that further development of this perspective is warranted.
...
 
Can't wait for the dystopian future where the EPA busts down my door like a militant IRS agent upset I lied on my tax forms for my gas stove installed by a Serbian immigrant.
 
So I can't keep it running 24/7? Okay, wasn't planning to anyway.
Me? I can't sleep without the smell of propane. Fr Fr tho, I'm not returning to electric after working with gas stovetops. I like being able to fry an egg without waiting minutes for the burner to heat up.
 
>the Center for Gas Bad found that gas bad
>the Center for Gas Good found that gas good
>this is proof that the Center for Gas Good is evil and uses trickery to shape public opinion, while the Center for Gas Bad is benevolent science we should trust unconditionally


Sometimes I wonder how people get to the point where they can say this shit. Whether you believe gas truly is bad or not, the illogic in use here is shockingly obvious.
In south-east asia pretty much every meal in every household has been prepared in a wok over a large gas flame for many generations.

I think we would know by now if "super dangerous gas stoves kill children" or not.


The real reason is probably that they will go after all stoves eventually. You don't need to cook bugs, you can eat the bugs raw.

It was amazing to watch the meme spread in real time. In just a few days virtually all good lefties were experts on air pollution and had known these stoves were death traps since forever.
It was like watching something out of 1984.

Gas stoves are dangerous. They have always been dangerous. We have always known they were dangerous. We have always wanted to stop them.

For a topic that none of them had ever even heard about 48 hours earlier. But now they were experts and this was established fact.
It was amazing to watch.
 
Last edited:
They will acknowledge there was periods of time where things like cigarettes were deemed "healthy" and had PhDs in their adverts, then turn right around and act like that same shit can't also occur today, because the "science is settled."

And they also acknowledge that we were wrong for shoving metal spikes into people's brains in order to cure their mental disorders (or at least turn them into vegetables out of a rationalization that they were easier to manage than mentally ill people).

And yet mutilating genitals and pumping people full of poison is OK, much better than actually treating gender dysphoria the proper way.

Or infringing on peoples' civil liberties to stop the spread of covid, while refusing to acknowledge that the spread of AIDS and Monkeypox can be stopped (or at least severely slowed down) by discouraging faggotry.

Excuse me for doubting the scienceTM.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mourning_Cloak
Gas Stoves Mean Dangerous Pollution in Most Homes, Study Finds
Bloomberg (archive.ph)
By Olivia Rudgard
2023-11-07 23:01:02GMT

stove01.jpg
Onions being sauteed on a gas ring on a domestic kitchen stove in London. Photographer: Betty Laura Zapata/Bloomberg

Households with gas stoves are regularly exposed to unsafe levels of air pollution that are above legal limits, a Europe-wide study found. By measuring exposure to nitrogen dioxide in homes with either gas or electric cooking appliances, researchers determined that NO2 concentrations were twice as high, on average, in homes that cooked with gas.

“The severity of indoor air pollution that is found in homes with gas cooking equipment is significantly higher than what we're seeing in electric cooking homes,” said Nicole Kearney, director of CLASP Europe, the NGO that commissioned the study. “The levels of indoor air pollution are higher often than what we see outdoors.”

Calls to regulate gas stoves have grown stronger in recent years as the health risks become clearer, particularly for children, the elderly and people with pre-existing conditions. In 2022, a US study connected more than 12% of current childhood asthma cases to gas stove use. The World Health Organization finds that children living in homes with gas stoves are at 20% higher risk of lung conditions like bronchitis and pneumonia.

For the study, the nonprofit Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research coordinated with CLASP to install sensors in 276 homes across seven countries — the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, France, Slovakia, Romania, and the UK — chosen for their higher-than-average share of households with gas cookers and of pediatric asthma associated with cooking on gas. Roughly 80% of homes in the study used gas for cooking, while the other 20% used electricity. The sensors measured levels of NO2, carbon monoxide and fine particulate matter in the kitchens and other rooms of the participants’ homes, as well as outdoors, over a 13-day period.

On average, levels of NO2 were higher outdoors than indoors for households using electric appliances. For households using gas, levels were higher indoors. Average kitchen levels in gas-cooking households were around 26.8 μg/m³ (micrograms per cubic meter), compared to 14 μg/m³ for electric.

The most extreme readings were even higher. One in four gas-cooking households exceeded the EU and UK hourly average legal limit of 200 μg/m³, and 57% exceeded the WHO’s recommended level of 25 μg/m³ as a daily average. For households with gas cookers, NO2 levels continued to increase as long as the stove or oven was on, which was not the case for electric cookers.

This is the largest European study of air pollution from gas cooking in homes to date, CLASP said. The organization called for subsidy programs that favor zero-carbon heat sources, such as heat pumps, to also include highly efficient electric induction stoves, and for energy labels on appliances to carry information about indoor air pollution. Legal limits on air pollution don’t apply indoors in the European Union or the UK, and regulations around appliance safety do not set specific limits on pollutants.

“We spend 80% to 90% of our time indoors, on average. Vulnerable groups might spend even more time indoors,” said Christian Pfrang, a professor in atmospheric science at the University of Birmingham, who was not involved in the research. “This particular study is comprehensive and adds evidence directly comparing indoor and outdoor pollution, and showing that NO2 is really a problem of gas hobs. It will lead to needless exposure of people to NO2 because there is a viable alternative to gas hobs.”
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Pedophobe
The gas industry relied on Hill & Knowlton, the same public relations company that masterminded the tobacco industry’s playbook for responding to research linking smoking to lung cancer. Hill & Knowlton’s tactics included sponsoring research that would counter findings about gas stoves published in the scientific literature, emphasizing uncertainty in these findings to construct artificial controversy and engaging in aggressive public relations efforts.
So it's bad when the gas industry uses hill and knowlton but when the WHO use them for covid it's good?

They also worked on the World Health Organization-funded COVID-19 campaign.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: quaawaa
Back