this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
36 points (84.6% liked)

Public Health

1096 readers
140 users here now

For issues concerning:

🩺 This community has a broader scope so please feel free to discuss. When it may not be clear, leave a comment talking about why something is important.

Related Communities

See the pinned post in the Medical Community Hub for links and descriptions. link (!medicine@lemmy.world)

Rules

Given the inherent intersection that these topics have with politics, we encourage thoughtful discussions while also adhering to the mander.xyz instance guidelines.

Try to focus on the scientific aspects and refrain from making overly partisan or inflammatory content

Our aim is to foster a respectful environment where we can delve into the scientific foundations of these topics. Thank you!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@mander.xyz
otter@lemmy.ca
36
Inhalers drive carbon emissions equivalent to 530,000 cars each year, study shows (phys.org)
submitted 8 hours ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/publichealth@mander.xyz
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Inhalers are the frontline treatment for asthma and COPD, but they come with a steep environmental cost, according to a new UCLA Health study—the largest to date quantifying inhaler-related emissions in the United States.

Researchers found that inhalers have generated over 2 million metric tons of carbon emissions annually over the past decade, equivalent to the emissions of roughly 530,000 gas-powered cars on the road each year.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dontsayaword@piefed.social 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

The article says there are alternatives to the polluting inhalers that the industry can shift towards. So its kind of a win, because now we have an easy way to reduce current emissions.

[–] bizarroland@lemmy.world 11 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

But also a kind reminder that if individual peoples' carbon emissions were completely eliminated from the planet, that would only decrease the amount of pollution being pumped into the air by like 10 to 20% at the very most.

80 to 90% of the carbon pumped in the air is done by corporations, and regulating the corporations would do more to decrease the CO2 emissions and pollution in the atmosphere than every single human on the planet being perfect, carbon negative saints.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/since-2016-80-percent-of-global-co2-emissions-come-from-just-57-companies-report-shows-180984118/

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I really dislike that argument. Because these companies are producing products that on turn get used by individuals

Oil companies aren't burning oil because it looks pretty, and coal power plants aren't burning coal because it smells so nice. Cement production isn't being used because it's fun to make liquid rocks. Sooner it later they are being used by individuals

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 33 minutes ago

Yes, but then they do everything from lobbying to spreading misinformation to make sure their products keep being used. When you focus on corporations, you can start implementing regulations and reform to tackle emissions at the macro scale. Want people to eat less meat? Stop subsidizing it. Want people to use less oil? Invest in renewable energy. Etc.