Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Sacramento
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-29-2008, 04:34 PM
 
615 posts, read 1,164,193 times
Reputation: 133

Advertisements

Why would anyone want to live in this environment???
Is Rocklin, Folsom, or Lincoln a better place to live
for cleaner air?
I just read some of the messages from this forum about the rail yard
and it scares the hec out me...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-29-2008, 07:18 PM
 
Location: Roseville, CA
238 posts, read 1,312,198 times
Reputation: 79


You were asking about living in the Westpark/Fiddyment Farm area. Those areas fall within the "50" zone on the above diagram, meaning that if 1,000,000 people lived within that area, 50 people would potentially be at risk for cancer due to the pollution. To put that in perspective, the chances of getting cancer from any cause are 200,000 to 250,000 in a million. In other words: the incremental chances of getting cancer due to living in the "50" zone are pretty damn infinitesimal compared to other factors.

Dirty air? I don't see it. But then, I grew up in the noticeably brown air of LA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2008, 12:20 PM
 
Location: San Diego (Unv Heights)
815 posts, read 2,687,300 times
Reputation: 627
I essentially grew up in Los Angeles and either their air quality has improved substantially, or ours has gotten progressively worse. When I visit family down in SoCal I no longer notice any difference between dirty Sacramento air or dirty L.A. air.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2008, 10:10 PM
 
Location: Roseville, CA
238 posts, read 1,312,198 times
Reputation: 79
The air quality in LA has definitely improved. While growing up I distinctly recall looking toward downtown LA, or the San Gabriel mountains, and seeing a thick haze of reddish-brown. I have not seen that in any of my visits back home the last 10-15 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2008, 08:58 AM
 
184 posts, read 794,052 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by quasi888 View Post


You were asking about living in the Westpark/Fiddyment Farm area. Those areas fall within the "50" zone on the above diagram, meaning that if 1,000,000 people lived within that area, 50 people would potentially be at risk for cancer due to the pollution. To put that in perspective, the chances of getting cancer from any cause are 200,000 to 250,000 in a million. In other words: the incremental chances of getting cancer due to living in the "50" zone are pretty damn infinitesimal compared to other factors.

Dirty air? I don't see it. But then, I grew up in the noticeably brown air of LA.
I lived in Los Angeles most of my life, moved to Sacramento in 1999 because of my husband's job finding. It seems to me that everyone i ever talked to in Sacramento ether had cancer or has someone in there life with cancer. I myself am always looking to find a way out of California for good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2008, 09:22 AM
 
Location: In a house
21,956 posts, read 24,198,514 times
Reputation: 15030
I lived in CA for my entire life. I remember driving to San Bernardino or Los Angeles..always a dreaded trip because of the horrible smog. Driving down the mountain it looked like a "fog". For the last 15 years it seemed to improve or I just got use to living in it when I move to Los Angeles from Big Bear lake. I can see the mountains in the distance more often then I use to. But still...yes, we did move as we wanted to see stars and breath healthier air! Seems a lot of people do have breathing problems or emphizima if they have lived in the higher polluted areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-04-2008, 12:33 PM
 
615 posts, read 1,164,193 times
Reputation: 133
With this in mind, they must have a Cancer Treatment Centers of America in Sacramento. Geez is the Sacramento are the cancer capitol of the U.S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2008, 02:21 AM
 
914 posts, read 2,899,788 times
Reputation: 642
Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive data about cancer clusters for any given region. It's sort of this weird, head-in-the-sand mentality that public health officials have. It's very difficult to find out information about how many cases of cancer are in your own neighborhood, and even if there were a lot, it never seems like there's enough to be considered an actual cancer cluster. You'd think with all the exposure to chemicals, toxins, pollution,etc. they would be eager to protect and inform the public. But it's just the opposite. I don't know if cities or states are afraid of lawsuits, or feel that discovery of health problems caused by hazards will have a domino effect and reduce property values, or what. it's truly a mystery to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2008, 06:28 PM
 
18 posts, read 126,917 times
Reputation: 37
As it says in the article, the "normal" expected cancer incidence is one of five people, conservatively estimating. Those living closest to the railyards would see an incidence increase of one in ten thousand people. This is a miniscule number.

Stop being a sensationalist, and take anything published in the Bee with a grain of salt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Sacramento

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top