Children with face mask back at school after covid-19 quarantine and lockdown.

(© Halfpoint - stock.adobe.com)

LONDON — Ideally, air pollution is something to avoid at all times. Unfortunately, there are certain places where we can at least expect to encounter dirtier air, such as in the heart of a big city or along a highway backed up with bumper-to-bumper traffic. Now, however, a new study finds six in 10 classrooms actually have worse air quality than traffic-filled roads.

Researchers in the United Kingdom handed out digital pollution monitors to both teachers and students attending 26 U.K. schools on 10 different occasions. Some of the most frequent pollutants detected by those monitors were volatile organic compoundsThese pollutants can come from plastics, glues, disinfectants, and solvents. Additionally, the monitors also recorded fine dust and suspended aerial liquid droplets, which are usually byproducts of heating, cooking, and transportation.

Notably, some of the schools in the study were located in big cities, while others were in smaller towns and villages. Surprisingly, location doesn’t seem to make much difference; indoor air pollution in village classrooms was just as bad as in urban areas.

Some readings even showed air pollution exceeding the one-hour exposure threshold set by the World Health Organization. In other words, students may be at risk of adverse health effects by continually breathing this air.

This study was commissioned by natural daily nasal wash Otrivine Natural as part of an initiative called “Actions to Breathe Cleaner.”

9 in 10 students are breathing in air pollution

According to the WHO, 93 percent of children all over the world breathe in polluted air every single day. The WHO recently deemed air pollution the largest global environmental health threat.

“We want to inspire people to take action against the health impact of air pollution because children contribute the least to it but are some of the most vulnerable to its effects. One of the first steps is to be aware of your personal exposure and then learn the actions you can take to breathe cleaner,” comments Sarah McDonald, GSK VP of Sustainability, in a statement.

“We discovered that indoor air quality can be worse than outdoors and therefore, as part of Actions to Breathe Cleaner, we recommend daily ventilation of classrooms, at times when outside traffic is at its lowest. Also, let’s not forget that our noses are our first line of defense, so another action is to wash your nose daily.”

The study also reports that while most students know air pollution is bad, they don’t know what they should do about it. Luckily, after participating in the “Actions to Breathe Cleaner” initiative, students’ general knowledge on air pollution and how to avoid it increased by 54 percent.

During the project, participating students analyzed the air quality inside and outside their schools over the course of two weeks via digital pollution monitors. Students had to monitor the quality of the air outside at one location for 15 minutes, during a 15 to 30-minute walk outside, and then once more inside the classroom for 15 minutes after the walk. Monitors inside the classrooms helped to gauge daily indoor pollution rhythms.

Furthermore, another 4,000 children participated in the project via a bespoke educational program that focused on classroom learning. Since the conclusion of the project, many participating schools tell researchers that they’ve started taking steps to improve indoor air quality, such as adding more plants.

About John Anderer

Born blue in the face, John has been writing professionally for over a decade and covering the latest scientific research for StudyFinds since 2019. His work has been featured by Business Insider, Eat This Not That!, MSN, Ladders, and Yahoo!

Studies and abstracts can be confusing and awkwardly worded. He prides himself on making such content easy to read, understand, and apply to one’s everyday life.

Our Editorial Process

StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate. We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves. All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.

Our Editorial Team

Steve Fink

Editor-in-Chief

Chris Melore

Editor

Sophia Naughton

Associate Editor