Wildfire smoke impacts respiratory health more than fine particles from other sources: observational evidence from Southern California

Abstract

Wildfires are becoming more frequent and destructive in a changing climate. Fine particulate matter, PM_2.5, in wildfire smoke adversely impacts human health. Recent toxicological studies suggest that wildfire particulate matter may be more toxic than equal doses of ambient PM_2.5. Air quality regulations however assume that the toxicity of PM_2.5 does not vary across different sources of emission. Assessing whether PM_2.5 from wildfires is more or less harmful than PM_2.5 from other sources is a pressing public health concern. Here, we isolate the wildfire-specific PM_2.5 using a series of statistical approaches and exposure definitions. We found increases in respiratory hospitalizations ranging from 1.3 to up to 10% with a 10 μg m⁻³ increase in wildfire-specific PM_2.5, compared to 0.67 to 1.3% associated with non-wildfire PM_2.5. Our conclusions point to the need for air quality policies to consider the variability in PM_2.5 impacts on human health according to the sources of emission.

Recent toxicological studies suggest that wildfire particulate matter may be more toxic than equal doses of ambient PM_2.5. Here, the authors show that even for similar exposure levels, PM_2.5 from wildfires is considerably more dangerous for respiratory health at the population level.