 |
 |
Article Two
Air Quality and the Olympics
Leendert van Bree
The Olympic Games are held in large cities where inevitably bad air quality and severe smog conditions are of great concern to human health. The exposure to particulate matter and ozone threatens the health of athletes and adversely affects their performance. Despite the large amounts of money spent on air pollution control during previous Olympic periods, the benefits seem rather limited.
The Beijing example
The extremely rapid economic growth of China has caused serious air pollution in large areas of the country, including Beijing, the central location for the 2008 Olympic Games. The air quality in Beijing varied significantly from day-to-day. 
Model calculations indicated that the concentrations of particulate matter regularly rose to 200 µg PM2.5/m3 (24-h average) and those of ozone to 160 µg ozon/m3 (8-h maximum). From the scarce measurement data it was confirmed that the 24-hour average PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations had values between 100-300 and 50-200 µg/m3, respectively, with yearly averages for these respective components of approximately 200 and 150 µg/m3. These concentrations greatly exceeded the European guidelines and standards. Moreover, high concentrations of SO2 and CO also occurred. The particulate matter levels in Beijing were frequently so high that many environment and health experts issued health warnings to citizens through the local media.
To counteract these effects, China budgeted no less than €11 billion for the air pollution control measures before and during the Games, primarily for tackling local traffic emissions and industrial emissions. Recent studies (Wang et al. 2009) on actual measurement data of particulate matter in Beijing before, during and after the 2008 Olympic Games, confirmed the earlier model predictions. Particle concentrations (PM10) were about 30% lower during the Olympic period. However, 40% was accounted for by meteorological factors and only 16% by source control. The PM10 concentrations in Beijing during the Olympic period were 2.9, 3.5, and 1.9 times higher than those in Atlanta, Sydney, and Athens
The Beijing example is not unique; cities like Athens, Atlanta, and Los Angeles have faced severe air quality problems during their Olympic Games, resulting in various efforts for control measures.
Measures during the Atlanta Games
During the Olympic Games in Atlanta (1996), measures were taken to prevent traffic congestion. As a result, it became possible to conduct studies into the health effects before, during and after the Games. The measures ensured that during the Atlanta Games, the 24-hour average PM10 concentrations were reduced from 40 to 30 µg/m3, while the maximum hourly concentrations of ozone declined from 160 to 120 µg/m3. Simultaneously with these changes, a decline of approximately 40% was observed in the total number of acute asthma attacks among children for which medical care was required. Due to the high correlation between the concentrations of PM10 and ozone, it was not possible to determine which of the two components was responsible for this decline. The studies provided an indication that traffic measures can achieve health benefits, results that were later confirmed in other studies.
Health effects
It is well-known that bad air quality and severe smog episodes adversely affect human health. In particular the exposure to particulate matter and ozone threatens the health of spectators and athletes. This situation can be so serious that both the sport performance of the athletes and the health of the certain risk groups of spectators can be negatively influenced. The latter applies especially to spectators who are in a high-risk group due to cardiovascular disease, asthma or poor health. In that case, acute effects can occur after even brief exposure. According to our current knowledge about the health effects of particulate matter and ozone, effects such as the following could occur:
- increased symptoms, illnesses and hospital admissions (with risk of premature mortality) due to cardiovascular problems and respiratory ailments;
- lowered immunity (with increased risk of infections);
- tissue damage and inflammation of airways and lungs;
- coughing and painful mucous membranes (eye, nose, throat);
- decreased lung function;
- decreased athletic performance capacity.
Smog and sport
Athletes are usually healthy people. For this reason, they do not belong to a risk group for air pollution. But due to their intensive exertion while engaging in sports, they breathe in large quantities of air. If this air is seriously polluted, their lung function can decrease and tissue damage can occur. For ozone, it is been shown that with heavy physical exertion and exposure, for example at levels of 200-300 µg/m3 (one-hour maximum), lung function and oxygen intake can decline by 5-10%. And although we know less about particulate matter, it is plausible that similar effects would also occur with exposure to this component, certainly at high concentrations. Bad air quality and severe smog episodes during the Olympic Games may therefore potentially limit the athlete’s capacity for performance.
Health advice from the Netherlands Olympic Committee
The medical staff of the Netherlands Olympic Committee & Netherlands Sport Federation (NOC*NSF) is aware of the possible adverse consequences of air pollution for athletes. For example, preceding the Athens Olympic Games (2004), a group of scientists were asked for advice about possible health effects, and athletes were tested for their respiratory sensitivity to ozone. This is because asthmatic athletes, if given permission to do so, can continue to use their medication or even increase the dosage if they have symptoms. Also, due to the possible negative effects of the heat during these games, recommendations were formulated to attempt to give these athletes some tools to deal with the negative consequences for their health and athletic performance capacity. These recommendations were:
- to try to determine where high concentrations of particulate matter and ozone can occur, and avoid those locations if possible, including locations with heavy traffic;
- to choose accommodation and training facilities preferably at a location with relatively low air pollution;
- to reduce the amount of time spent outdoors and reduce physical exertion levels while outdoors;
- to try to eat healthily, supplemented with extra protein, vitamins and antioxidants, to reduce the susceptibility of the respiratory system and to promote recovery capacity;
- to arrive at the location as much in advance as possible, for example three to five days beforehand, to become adapted to the air pollution; as a result, the rapid initial decline in respiratory function may possibly recover.
The actual health benefits of the latter two recommendations are uncertain. With respect to ozone, it is known that the initial decline in lung function disappears during an exposure of several days; consequently, it would seem that adaptation occurs. However, this adaptation does not seem to apply to the immune system, so that increased risk of infection can remain. In addition, it is difficult to predict the effects and the adaptation for an individual athlete.
The potentially beneficial effect of administering additional antioxidants is also scientifically uncertain, while the dosage must not be excessive. With preparations comparable to those for the Athens Games, the NOC*NSF gave a similar advice to the athletes for the Beijing Games. However, Athens is a city with relatively high levels of ozone, while in Beijing the high particulate matter concentrations are of great concern. It therefore remains questionable whether these recommendations were applicable to the Beijing exposure situation.
Conclusions
Bad air quality and smog threaten the performance capacity of athletes and may also adversely affect spectators’ health if they belong to a high-risk group with cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and a poor health.
It is crucial that air quality experts join forces to further optimise and validate regional modelling of air quality and to study the possibility and effectiveness of regional and local air pollution control measures at Olympic events.
It is important that environmental health and medical experts share their knowledge of adverse health effects of air pollution and of possible ways to adapt or counteract the effects. Studies on health benefits of (local) air pollution interventions are needed.
In addition to the sound Olympic credo, it is the responsibility of everyone to create conditions at which athletes can optimally perform. A further science-authority-athlete-Olympic Committee interplay is needed to further achieve this goal.
Dr. Leendert van Bree (leendert.vanbree@pbl.nl) works at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) in Bilthoven, The Netherlands. He is programme director Health, Well-being, and Quality of Life.