Air pollution contributes significantly to diabetes globally

June 30, 2018 by Kristina Sauerwein, Washington University in St. Louis
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

New research links outdoor air pollution—even at levels deemed safe—to an increased risk of diabetes globally, according to a study from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and the Veterans Affairs (VA) St. Louis Health Care System.

The findings raise the possibility that reducing may lead to a drop in diabetes cases in heavily polluted countries such as India and less polluted ones such as the United States.

Diabetes is one of the fastest growing diseases, affecting more than 420 million people worldwide and 30 million Americans. The main drivers of diabetes include eating an unhealthy diet, having a sedentary lifestyle, and obesity, but the new research indicates the extent to which outdoor plays a role.

"Our research shows a significant link between air pollution and diabetes globally," said Ziyad Al-Aly, MD, the study's senior author and an assistant professor of medicine at Washington University. "We found an increased risk, even at low levels of air pollution currently considered safe by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the World Health Organization (WHO). This is important because many industry lobbying groups argue that current levels are too stringent and should be relaxed. Evidence shows that current levels are still not sufficiently safe and need to be tightened."

The findings are published June 29 in The Lancet Planetary Health.

While growing evidence has suggested a link between air pollution and diabetes, researchers have not attempted to quantify that burden until now. "Over the past two decades, there have been bits of research about diabetes and pollution," Al-Aly said. "We wanted to thread together the pieces for a broader, more solid understanding."

To evaluate outdoor air pollution, the researchers looked at particulate matter, airborne microscopic pieces of dust, dirt, smoke, soot and liquid droplets. Previous studies have found that such particles can enter the lungs and invade the bloodstream, contributing to major health conditions such as heart disease, stroke, cancer and kidney disease. In diabetes, pollution is thought to reduce insulin production and trigger inflammation, preventing the body from converting blood glucose into energy that the body needs to maintain health.

Overall, the researchers estimated that pollution contributed to 3.2 million new diabetes cases globally in 2016, which represents about 14 percent of all new diabetes cases globally that year. They also estimated that 8.2 million years of healthy life were lost in 2016 due to pollution-linked diabetes, representing about 14 percent of all years of healthy life lost due to diabetes from any cause. (The measure of how many years of healthy life are lost is often referred to as "disability-adjusted life years.")

In the United States, the study attributed 150,000 new cases of diabetes per year to air pollution and 350,000 years of lost annually.

The Washington University team, in collaboration with scientists at the Veterans Affairs' Clinical Epidemiology Center, examined the relationship between particulate matter and the risk of diabetes by first analyzing data from 1.7 million U.S. veterans who were followed for a median of 8.5 years. The veterans did not have histories of diabetes. The researchers linked that patient data with the EPA's land-based air monitoring systems as well as space-borne satellites operated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). They used several statistical models and tested the validity against controls such as ambient air sodium concentrations, which have no link to diabetes, and lower limb fractures, which have no link to outdoor air pollution, as well as the risk of developing diabetes, which exhibited a strong link to air pollution. This exercise helped the researchers weed out spurious associations.

Then, they sifted through all research related to diabetes and and devised a model to evaluate diabetes risk across various pollution levels.

Finally, they analyzed data from the Global Burden of Disease study, which is conducted annually with contributions from researchers worldwide. The data helped to estimate annual cases of diabetes and healthy years of life lost due to pollution.

The researchers also found that the overall risk of pollution-related diabetes is tilted more toward lower-income countries such as India that lack the resources for environmental mitigation systems and clean-air policies. For instance, poverty-stricken countries facing a higher diabetes-pollution risk include Afghanistan, Papua New Guinea and Guyana, while richer countries such as France, Finland and Iceland experience a lower risk. The U.S. experiences a moderate risk of pollution-related diabetes.

In the U.S., the EPA's pollution threshold is 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air, the highest level of air pollution considered safe for the public, as set by the Clean Air Act of 1990 and updated in 2012. However, using mathematical models, Al-Aly's team established an increased at 2.4 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Based on VA data, among a sample of veterans exposed to pollution at a level of between 5 to 10 micrograms per cubic meter of air, about 21 percent developed diabetes. When that exposure increases to 11.9 to 13.6 micrograms per cubic meter of air, about 24 percent of the group developed diabetes. A 3 percent difference appears small, but it represents an increase of 5,000 to 6,000 new diabetes cases per 100,000 people in a given year.

In October 2017, The Lancet Commission on pollution and health published a report outlining knowledge gaps on pollution's harmful health effects. One of its recommendations was to define and quantify the relationship between pollution and diabetes.

"The team in St. Louis is doing important research to firm up links between pollution and health conditions such as ," said commission member Philip J. Landrigan, MD, a pediatrician and epidemiologist who is the dean for global health at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York and chair of its Department of Preventive Medicine. "I believe their research will have a significant global impact."

Explore further: Breathing dirty air may harm kidneys, study finds

Related Stories

Breathing dirty air may harm kidneys, study finds

September 21, 2017
Outdoor air pollution has long been linked to major health conditions such as heart disease, stroke, cancer, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A new study now adds kidney disease to the list, according to ...

T2DM risk in offspring greater with T2DM versus GDM exposure

June 14, 2018
(HealthDay)—In utero exposure to type 2 diabetes is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes in offspring versus exposure to gestational diabetes, according to a study published online June 11 in JAMA Pediatrics.

Study finds air pollution linked to diabetes and hypertension in African-American women

January 5, 2012
(Boston) -The incidence of type 2 diabetes and hypertension increases with cumulative levels of exposure to nitrogen oxides, according to a new study led by researchers from the Slone Epidemiology Center (SEC) at Boston University. ...

Scientists investigate link between air pollution and type 2 diabetes

June 29, 2017
An interdisciplinary team of scientists from the University of Leicester and other institutions has played a pivotal role in research investigating a possible link between air pollution and the rise in type 2 diabetes.

Women with diabetes exposed to air pollution at higher risk for heart disease

November 25, 2015
Women with diabetes who are exposed to air pollution for long periods may have a much higher risk for heart disease, according to a long-term, nationwide study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.

Air pollution and cardiovascular disease: Increased risk for women with diabetes

November 25, 2015
Air pollution is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and some people may be more susceptible to its effects than others. Investigators from Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) and Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public ...

Recommended for you

Why we shouldn't like coffee, but we do

November 15, 2018
Why do we like the bitter taste of coffee? Bitterness evolved as a natural warning system to protect the body from harmful substances. By evolutionary logic, we should want to spit it out.

Dietary fat is good? Dietary fat is bad? Coming to consensus

November 15, 2018
Which is better, a low-fat/high-carbohydrate diet or a high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet—or is it the type of fat that matters? In a new paper featured on the cover of Science magazine's special issue on nutrition, researchers ...

Survey reveals how we use music as a possible sleep aid

November 14, 2018
Many individuals use music in the hope that it fights sleep difficulties, according to a study published November 14 in the open-access journal PLOS ONE by Tabitha Trahan of the University of Sheffield, UK, and colleagues. ...

Colder, darker climates increase alcohol consumption and liver disease

November 14, 2018
Where you live could influence how much you drink. According to new research from the University of Pittsburgh Division of Gastroenterology, people living in colder regions with less sunlight drink more alcohol than their ...

Can't exercise? A hot bath may help improve inflammation, metabolism, study suggests

November 14, 2018
Hot water treatment may help improve inflammation and blood sugar (glucose) levels in people who are unable to exercise, according to a new study. The findings are published ahead of print in the Journal of Applied Physiology.

Want to cut down on your meds? Your pharmacist can help.

November 14, 2018
Pharmacists are pivotal in the process of deprescribing risky medications in seniors, leading many to stop taking unnecessary sleeping pills, anti-inflammatories and other drugs, a new Canadian study has found.

16 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

aksdad
1 / 5 (8) Jun 30, 2018
Did they control for body fat and sugar consumption? Just sayin...
sedumjoy
5 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2018
wonderful , how many millions of people die from air pollution? so that is considered acceptable? the problem has now morphed into climate problems ......that changes the landscape ....you can't ignore now like you have for the last 100 years
MR166
1 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2018
People are living longer than ever due to fossil fuels and the chemical industry. Do any of these doom and gloom papers make any scientific sense? Nope they just represent the biases of the anti-fossil establishment.
MR166
1 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2018
What a crock of BS!!!! Sugars, milled grain products, potatoes and rice are the biggest cause of diabetes. The all raise blood sugar levels and cause obesity. As people exit poverty and can afford to purchase more food the extra sugar and starches lead to insulin resistance.
HeloMenelo
5 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2018
Did they control for body fat and sugar consumption? Just sayin...

Did you bump your head onto a branch... Again... ??
rrwillsj
3 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2018
MR6, they are discussing possible ways air pollution specifically might influence the complexity of the underlying biology. It may turn out to be subtle trigger for those already vulnerable to multiple causes.

Your body doesn't come with an off/on switch. Each of your biological functions would rival the Internet for complexity. And what is 'true' for one person? May be 'false' for the next person.

I can understand your knee-jerk reaction to discussing your biological functions and the enormity of environmental influences upon your life cycle.

You were raised and conditioned in a society that teaches you to be ashamed of your body. It is up to you to overcome such short-sighted social mores. If only that you can converse honestly with your medical service providers.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Jul 02, 2018
"how many millions of people die from air pollution? so that is considered acceptable?"

It always depends on how profitable the pollution is for the one doing the polluting and how many politicians that profit can buy.

Morally/ethically 'acceptable' doesn't come into it.
betterexists
1 / 5 (1) Jul 02, 2018
DIABETES -- If People turn to Sea food, which is devoid of carbohydrates unlike plants, snacks & desserts....it may help. The best way to kill a whale is to shoot iron pikes with chains and then with bullets ONLY IF IT IS LEGAL..... Freeze it, Distribute it. More Sea Food from then on, since it could have consumed trillions of fish during its lifetime. DO YOU REALLY WANT TO WATCH IT in Seas, Why? OR Preserve it for the Posterity? Any Good Reason ? Saving Honeybees makes sense, yes !
betterexists
1 / 5 (1) Jul 02, 2018
DIABETES -- If People turn to Sea food, which is devoid of carbohydrates unlike plants, snacks & desserts....it may help.
Think of it ! Even Humans were nailboarded and then treated with tremendous RESPECT ?
betterexists
1 / 5 (1) Jul 02, 2018
DIABETES -- If People turn to Sea food, which is devoid of carbohydrates unlike plants, snacks & desserts....it may help.
IRON Pikes with Chains is to pull the Whale to the Ship after it is sent to Heaven/Hell !
rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Jul 02, 2018
Uhh,be? you seem to have confused cetaceans (whales, i.e. mammals) with pisces (fish, i.e. Osteichthyes).

That whole drunken episode between Noah and Jonah must have thrown you off? So easy mix up all those bad translations of the inebriated caterwauling of mediocre bards. Could happen to anyone. Well, to anyone suffering delirium tremulous anyway!
Porgie
1 / 5 (1) Jul 02, 2018
This is a crock. Anything to blame industry.
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Jul 02, 2018
""how many millions of people die from air pollution? so that is considered acceptable?"

It always depends on how profitable the pollution is for the one doing the polluting and how many politicians that profit can buy. "

Nothing has increased the lifespan of humans more than fossil fuels and the industrial revolution. The pollution thus created might reduce the amount of this increase but none the less there is still a net benefit to mankind. People move to polluted cities because there are jobs there and they were starving in rural pollution free areas.
barakn
1 / 5 (1) Jul 03, 2018
Nothing has increased the lifespan of humans more than fossil fuels and the industrial revolution.

Infant mortality has an oversized impact on lifespan and most of the gains in lifespan can be attributed to reductions in infant mortality. And here, antibiotics and vaccines play the biggest roles.
MR166
1 / 5 (1) Jul 04, 2018
Before fossil fuels and the industrial revolution most people were farmers living in what today is considered poverty and doing hard physical labor dawn to dusk. It was very hard work and those lucky enough to reach adulthood were lucky to live to 60. Today people make a living clicking on a mouse for eight hours and consider that to be unfair. People are active for decades longer now. You can directly thank fossil and its "pollution" for these advances.
barakn
1 / 5 (1) Jul 04, 2018
It was very hard work and those lucky enough to reach adulthood were lucky to live to 60.
No. Once again, that number includes infant mortality. https://www.psych...pectancy

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.