Tag: asthma

Meta-Analysis of Over 100 Studies Shows Gas Stoves Pose No Increased Risks of Asthma

It turns out, pushing unrealistic green energy schemes onto low- and middle-income people at the expense of a safer fuel source was not only bad science, but it was also dangerous propaganda.

A woman and a girl are cooking together in a modern kitchen, with a focus on a gas stove and fresh ingredients on the countertop.

From Watts Up With That?

It turns out, pushing unrealistic green energy schemes onto low- and middle-income people at the expense of a safer fuel source was not only bad science, but it was also dangerous propaganda.

A bar chart illustrating the relationship between gas stoves and asthma, showing corrected meta-analytic results and findings from large studies, with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

From Legal Insurrection

Posted by Leslie Eastman 

Legal Insurrection readers may recall that in 2023, the Biden administration seriously considered a nationwide ban on gas stoves, blaming “pollutants” released by the appliances.

One of the studies cited was published in Scientific American. We documented the narrative science and agenda-driven conclusions that the publication offers.

The “study” involved 53 households, all in California.  As I reported at that time, the findings that asserted gas stoves contributed to increased risk of asthma were based on bad science.

Now, a review of the data from 116 separate studies that was recently published in The Lancet and funded by the World Health Organization shows that heating and cooking with natural gas stoves is not associated with asthma in children or adults.

The study conducted an extensive meta-analysis and examined the health risks of cooking or heating with natural gas compared to other fuels and electricity. It found no significant association between natural gas and asthma, wheeze, cough or breathlessness, and a lower risk of bronchitis when compared to electricity. When compared to other household fuels including kerosene and solid fuels, natural gas was associated with a lower risk of several health conditions.

The study’s conclusion that there is no association between the use of natural gas and asthma contradicts prior claims of population incidence of asthma attributable to gas, which are only valid where a causal relationship exists.

In fact, the Lancet study (Estimated health effects from domestic use of gaseous fuels for cooking and heating in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analyses) shows that the use of gas stoves has a very positive effect on human health, as follows:

  • Pneumonia: 46% risk reduction.
  • Wheeze: 58% risk reduction.
  • Cough: 56% risk reduction.
  • Breathlessness, COPD, Other Adverse Respiratory Impacts: Substantial risk reductions.
  • Preterm Birth and Low Birth Weight: Significant reduction in risk.

It’s important to note that when natural gas burns, it mainly produces carbon dioxide (CO₂, a life-essential gas) and water vapor, with smaller amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOₓ), carbon monoxide (CO), and very little particulate matter. In contrast, coal and kerosene are more complex fuels. For example, burning coal releases high amounts of particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxides, mercury, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, all of which are linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.

Therefore, pushing unrealistic green energy schemes onto low- and middle-income (LMIC) people at the expense of a safer fuel source was not only bad science, but it was also dangerous propaganda.

This study shows a lower risk for key health outcomes when switching from polluting solid fuels and kerosene to use of clean gaseous fuels for cooking or heating. Our study also identifies a modest increase in risk from use of gaseous fuels compared with electricity for a few health outcomes, including acute lower respiratory infections and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (although not statistically significant when focusing on evidence from higher-quality studies).

For LMICs reliant on polluting solid fuels and kerosene, transitions to gaseous fuels for cooking or heating can potentially produce substantial health benefits.

The risk of asthma associated with gas cooking was often inflated in prior studies that failed to adjust adequately for other factors (e.g., smoking, area air pollution). The Lancet meta-analysis showed that with proper adjustment for possible contributing factors, any association between gas use and child asthma was not statistically meaningful.

Remember when researchers claimed gas stoves were responsible for 1-in-8 asthma cases in the U.S.?

That didn’t hold up.

The meta-analysis was done incorrectly, and correcting it rendered its result nonsignificant.

Then, a very large, well-done study found no risk elevation. pic.twitter.com/fltmNZhSgF— Crémieux (@cremieuxrecueil) August 4, 2025

What are the chances the elite media will give the new Lancet publication the same about of attention it gave the bogus study?

Here is the answer: pic.twitter.com/e6SFTsSXjG— Leslie Eastman ☥ (@Mutnodjmet) August 5, 2025

Climate change is 100% bad: Now causing allergies, asthma in rich countries and not poor ones

We know it’s a cult or long-form advertising when every possible consequence is 100% bad, bad, bad, and for everyone, all the time.

By Jo Nova

It’s too *bad* to be true

We know it’s a cult or long-form advertising when every possible consequence is 100% bad, bad, bad, and for everyone, all the time.

Climate change will cause more droughts, except when it rains, and that means more pollen (obviously?!). Even though summers will be longer, and spring will be earlier, and flowers will go extinct, the pollen will be more potent (whatever that is). More people will get asthma, and even though we don’t know what causes allergies, we know that it will get worse with climate change, whatever it is, because everything does.

You too will be locked in your house, afraid to leave, unable to breathe, unless you get solar panels and an EV.

This was Australian’s national news prime time story tonight on our public “news” service. Australians spent some part of 3 million dollars today on their ABC, where regional health reporter Steven Schubert asked no hard questions, did almost no research, and sought no alternative views. He just found an asthmatic trophy victim to use as a poster-girl for F.E.A.R.

As the climate changes, researchers say our allergies will only get worse

ABC Propaganda Channel

Whether Caitlin Ross will go outside on any given day depends on weather and pollen forecasts.  If they’re too bad, her severe allergies and asthma mean it can be too uncomfortable or dangerous.

  • Researchers say pollen is becoming more potent, and seasons longer, as the climate changes
  • They expect the number of Australian hay fever sufferers to grow by 70 per cent over the next three decades

Poor Caitlin. Her symptoms have got worse these last five years. The ABC news works like hypnosis planting the suggestion that if your asthma got worse lately “it’s climate change”, as if asthma never gets better or worse for any other reason.

Climate change is affecting asthma already — we know because we did an opinion poll:

    • A recent survey showed climate change was already affecting the health of asthmatic Australia

A survey conducted by advocacy group Asthma Australia in 2023 showed that 91 per cent of people with asthma were very concerned about the impacts of climate change, according to CEO Michele Goldman.

She said 39 per cent of asthmatics surveyed said climate change was already affecting their health, compared to 21 per cent of people without asthma.

It’s like ignorant climate models went on dates with a Women’s Weekly story on asthma from 1985, and gave birth to yet another scary narrative.

In the real world of health and biology the rise of  asthma in the last fifty years could be due to diet, pollution, hygiene, loss of gut flora, or a lack of parasites. It could be due to leaky guts, new highly allergenic wheat strains, heavy metals, pesticides, or all of the above. It could be because kids don’t get to eat dirt or play with farm animals, and it could be because kids don’t play in the sun and get their vitamin D.

Asthma is a first world problem, not a climate change one

Since asthma rates are lower in poor countries and lower in country towns rather than in cities —  the one variable that doesn’t matter much is the climate.

OWID

So these researchers — whoever they are, are starting with models that can’t predict rainfall, humidity, soil moisture, cloud cover and wind speed, and use those errors to not-predict plant growth and pollen movement. Then they take all those failures and run headlong into a medical swamp.

This is lousy science, bad reporting, and incompetent “investigation”.

More like reading tea leaves every day.