Haven't you been following the news about China lately? They're putting lead paint in the air!

Well, how else are they going to make sure the skies stay blue?

How is it "unscientific"?

Of course the air is sh*tty...a scientist doesn't need to figure this out.

It's unscientific just like your comment.

This past winter, particulates in the air went off the scale- literally, the instruments weren't calibrated to measure more than X ppm of suspended bits. Air quality in Beijing is a scandal, and people should know for their own health. Look at Bangkok- they've successfully addressed air quality standards through responsible local enforcement, and supposedly have kept it up right through the coup.

The longer I live here, the more exhausted I feel criticizing the government for one thing or another. It's hard to live like that, and you've got to let things slide for your own sake, and the sake of friends. But an approach I often see other expatriots use is to simply minimize and dismiss critical voices. Often, the critics are bozos for one reason or another, and deserve to be dismissed. But China is such a deeply flawed country, even jerks can hit the nail on the head more often than not.

Jeremey, so you're saying there's nothing wrong with Beijing air? Let's be honest, if you'd lived in Beijing for 12 years with the level of pollution we are seeing and reading about today chances are you'd not be as healty as you are now.

Also you're younger and generally healthier than a lot of people who might come to watch the Olympics - it may well be better for those with health problems to stay at home.

Now the real question is, why are you so defensive? You're not a scientist or a doctor with more seniority than this WHO official, are you? Why are you trying to dismiss an obvious problem such as Beijing's awful pollution?

"Now the real question is, why are you so defensive? You're not a scientist or a doctor with more seniority than this WHO official, are you? Why are you trying to dismiss an obvious problem such as Beijing's awful pollution?"---RAJ

Maybe the answer to that is people are so defensive and dismissive because the pollution went to their head...BUT that would be unscientific for me to say.

If you fly to somewhere like Europe or the States (NOT L.A.) where the air is tolerable then fly back to Beijing you can smell the crap in the air upon landing. Of course then again my sense of smell doesn't have a doctorate.

Often the perception is more important than reality.

I haven't seen any real data on Beijing pollutions but I wouldn't doubt it tho, Beijing has pretty bad pollution. Let's not even talk about the West, let's compare Suzhou with Beijing... But I haven't been to Beijing since 2005, so a lot could have happened since. When the sky is blue in Beijing Beijing is actually pretty nice.

Man I'm saying why can't the government just force people not to drive cars? I'm not talking about a quick hack like the one they're attempting now (even odd cars), why not try something more drastic that guarantees results in the long term? Probably because the problem itself is HARD!

But then again these are all growing pains. This is what China get for wanting to "rise." I have a sliver of hope that these problems will all be eventually worked out (but at what cost and how long?). But man what a bunch of problems!

It is crucial that this blog gets advertising--after all, that is the field in which Mr. Goldkorn resides. (He is not an accredited journalist.) The more criticisms of the Olympics to be held in Beijing, the less likely that corporate sponsorship will grace his site.

So, he probably wants to go on record--even though he has no medical expertise--as saying that such warnings about the air quality here are simply not true. Why? Because they cannot possibly be true. Why not? Because the financial consequences for this blog are too terrible to contemplate.

I can't claim any scientific prowess, but I'll tell you one thing: I've been in Beijing twice, and in Shanghai three times, and every single time I go to those cities I get a very bad case of bronchitis, I develop lots of phlegm and, for the sake of politeness, I'll stop there. You can't tell me that this is healthy. I don't care how unscientific that doctor's statement is, I believe him. Older people breathing in bad air and suffering lung problems because of it would undoubtedly put a stress on their heart.

Anyone who wants to have a healthy body would do well to stay out of Beijing.

Life expectancy in Beijing is still rising because of better healthcare due to economic growth... from burning fossil fuels.

Until air pollution offsets the public health gains, I say let the smoke stacks spew...

I'll have to side with SinaSource, I'm afraid: it is indeed the money. Not business advertising, mind you, but rising labor costs. When the Telegraph article made the rounds at Danwei HQ, we started to hear rumblings among the translation peons about a potential strike to demand hazard pay for being forced to work in downtown Beijing. Striking is, of course, against the law, but taking things to the courts would risk exposing Danwei's unsavory labor practices to the world, and the consequences of that are truly too terrible to contemplate. Instead, upper management thought it best to simply deny the facts and attack the messenger.

Also, I don't think that Jeremy's ever claimed to be a journalist, accredited or otherwise (in fact, careful reading of this post reveals quite the opposite). Of course, given the freewheeling opportunism that characterizes the Danwei empire, and our contacts among the grey-market documentation community, it would not be surprising in the least to find a whole contingent of journalists stationed at Danwei HQ, should it become advantageous to do so.

Dr Krzyzanowski's comments are misleading for two reasons. If he wants to issue warnings to people visiting Beijing specifically for the Olympic Games then why has the WHO not seen it fit to issue travel warnings to tourists all year round? Secondly, pinpointing the Olympic Games as a time when tourists should be wary is clearly way off the mark. Pollution will be much lower than normal during this period - cars on the roads will be limited and factory output will be minimized as everyone knows. I'm not saying the air will be clean - probably just a similar level of particulate matter as there was floating around in Athens three years ago. Nor am I defending Beijing's air pollution - it's horrendous and the government needs to come up with more than just short-term measures.

Dr Krzyzanowski originally said this in an interview with BBC sport. In its entirety, I found his opinion to be thoughtful, well-balanced and accurate. I put it to you that the Telegraph article’s author, Graeme Baker, has made very selective use of the doctor's statement and is the one guilty of being unscientific, attention-seeking and alarmist.

There are other issues with the Torygraph article, making it read very much like a remote job. Busses and trains were no more “filled” than normal in the experience of this commuter (who takes both daily). It also claims, implausibly, that the number of city streets is growing by 1,200 a day and later on, that the number of cars increases by the same rate and number. Copy and paste lessons anyone?

Advice on visiting Beijing should indeed come with a health warning. But so too should ex situ journalism.

The majority of the article was culled from agency copy filed by reporters in the city. The doctor's quotes, I believe, were taken from the BBC's website.

hi, you might be interested to see real data in this discussion; i have recently tried to bring some together on my blog Beijing Air