SACRAMENTO, CA--The Stupid Statistic of the Month award goes to the medical researcher who released a study this week finding that Academy Award winners live 3.9 years longer than nominees who don’t win the Oscar. Sounds like grounds for a class action lawsuit, and a new victim group for the EEOC to look after.

Surely the American Lung Association will want to look into this matter. Two weeks ago the ALA breathlessly--so to speak--produced a study that deserves an Academy Award for Best Special Statistical Effects in a Horror Script. The ALA’s “State of the Air” report gained huge headlines with its “finding” that “air pollution” was up seven percent in the U.S. last year, and is a “major health threat” to 141 million Americans.

Close readers of PRI research will immediately observe: This clashes rather directly with the most recent Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, which proclaimed the reduction in air pollution to be the largest public policy success story in the U.S. over the last generation. Either PRI or the American Lung Association must be reading the EPA data tables upside down.

The first sign of trouble with the ALA study comes when one notes that “air pollution” is defined only as ozone, not any of the other five pollutants we regulate, such as carbon monoxide, lead, or particulates--all of which have serious health risks associated with them. But because levels of these pollutants have fallen so dramatically, it wouldn’t make for much of a scare headline to include them.

Ozone is the toughest pollution problem for most areas. Even so, were we able to cross-examine the authors of the ALA study, the dialogue might well go something like this: “Mr. Lung Man, are ozone levels in American cities higher or lower than they were 10 years ago?” “Harumph." “Sorry, sir, could you speak up? I couldn’t hear your answer.” “Lower.”

The ALA study can find that “air pollution” is increasing only by looking at the time period of 1996-1998 (even though data through 2000 is available on the EPA website), when there was a slight uptick in ambient ozone levels in the U.S. We reported this uptick in our Index as well, but noted some of the reasons for this (especially hot summers in the southeast). The long-term ozone trend is likely to continue to be down. But had the ALA considered the trend of the last decade, they couldn’t have come up with their scaremongering headlines.

The ALA further argues that 141 million Americans are exposed to unhealthful air only by using a health threshold one-third stricter than the current EPA standard, which many health experts, and a federal appeals court, have concluded is not well founded. Joel Schwartz of the Reason Public Policy Institute succinctly argues: “Ironically, ALA’s efforts could actually reduce Americans’ health and safety. The ALA report could cause the public to demand many billions of dollars in expenditures to clean up air that is already clean.”

It’s ironic that the American Lung Association, which has done such good work on the cigarette issue, has become a smoldering stogie of misinformation on air pollution. They need to relax, take a deep breath, and get the facts straight.

- By Steven Hayward