The public health
implications of our study might be more obvious than the clinical
implications, but at least one clinical aspect should be mentioned. I
guess that doctors in the clinic are sometimes approached by patients
being anxious about the risk of lung cancer when living/walking/cycling,
…. in areas with high levels of air pollution, e.g. streets with dense
traffic. I believe that an important implication of the study is to make
clear to such anxious patients the risk proportions, i.e. that the risk
for lung cancer in association with ambient air pollution is much, much
lower than the risk in association with active smoking. The risk in
association with air pollution is more comparable with the risk in
association with passive smoking.
