Es gilt auch die schwächsten zu schützen und dies sind Kinder, daher sind die Werte für Erwachsene Arbeitnehmer kein Referzenzwert für alle.
The Lancet
NO2 increases the risk for childhood asthma: a global concern
In the past decade, studies and statements from international agencies on the relationship between ambient air pollution and human health have raised the call for action. An analysis1 of the data from the Global Burden of Diseases Study 2015 indicated that approximately 4·2 million deaths and 103 million disability-adjusted life-years were attributable to exposure to particulates, with similar data available from WHO.2 The Lancet Commission on Air Pollution and Health3 stated that 16% of all premature deaths in 2015 were attributable to pollution. Among these alarming statistics, adverse respiratory health assumes a priority position, particularly among children.
Childhood asthma has reached global epidemic proportions4 and, although the evidence for a causal relationship with ambient pollution is still emerging, studies have repeatedly shown associations of pollution with various asthma phenotypes and proxy markers, such as emergency room visits, school absenteeism, and steroid dependency. However, a level of inconsistency exists across various pollutants for these outcomes. For example, a 2017 meta-analysis5 reported the varying risk for asthma incidence across studies, with odds ratios ranges of 0·93–1·25 for each 4 μg/m3 increase in nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations and 0·84–1·32 for each 1 μg/m3 increase in fine particulate matter (PM2·5) concentrations. Despite these inconsistencies, meta-analyses5, 6 of traffic-related air pollution and childhood asthma incidence provide convincing evidence for increased risk of exposure, particularly for NO2. These effects are seen at concentrations below the ambient air quality guidelines recommended by WHO7 of 40 μg/m3 (21 ppb) annual average NO2 concentrations. A better understanding of the pollutant-related effects on childhood asthma incidence at a global level is crucial to addressing interventions and policy initiatives. In The Lancet Planetary Health, Pattanun Achakulwisut and colleagues8 provide a novel approach to this challenge.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(19)30059-2/fulltext
Und vor diesem Hintergrund spielt NO2 eine wesentliche Rolle:
Background
Adverse respiratory effects in children with asthma are associated with exposures to nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Levels indoors can be much higher than outdoors. Primary indoor sources of NO2 are gas stoves, which are used for cooking by one-third of US households. We investigated effects of indoor NO2 exposure on asthma severity among an ethnically and economically diverse sample of children, controlling for season and indoor allergen exposure.
Methods
Children aged 5–10 years with active asthma (n=1,342), were recruited through schools in urban and suburban Connecticut and Massachusetts (2006–2009) for a prospective, year-long study with seasonal measurements of NO2 and asthma severity. Exposure to NO2 was measured passively for four, month-long, periods with Palmes tubes. Asthma morbidity was concurrently measured by a severity score and frequency of wheeze, night symptoms and use of rescue medication. We used adjusted, hierarchical ordered logistic regression models to examine associations between household NO2 exposure and health outcomes.
Results
Every 5 ppb increase in NO2 exposure above a threshold of 6 ppb was associated with a dose-dependent increase in risk of higher asthma severity score (odds ratio= 1.37 [95% confidence interval= 1.01 – 1.89]), wheeze (1.49 [1.09 – 2.03]), night symptoms (1.52 [1.16 – 2.00]) and rescue medication use (1.78 [1.33 – 2.38]).
Conclusions
Asthmatic children exposed to NO2 indoors, at levels well below the US Environmental Protection Agency outdoor standard (53 ppb), are at risk for increased asthma morbidity. Risks are not confined to inner-city children, but occur at NO2 concentrations common in urban and suburban homes.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3686297/
Zudem ist der Vergleich mit einer Exposition für die Arbeitszeit - welche einen Maximalwert darstellt - nicht mit einer Dauerexposition gleichzusetzen.
Der EU-Grenzwert (Jahresmittelwert) für die Stickstoffdioxidkonzentration (NO2) in der Außenluft beträgt 40 µg/m³ – der Arbeitsplatzgrenzwert ist mit 950 µg/m³ wesentlich höher. Ein Arbeitsplatzgrenzwert ist ein Wert für die zeitlich begrenzte Belastung gesunder Arbeitender, während durch NO2 in der Außenluft auch empfindliche Personen rund um die Uhr betroffen sein können.
Bei der Ableitung von Grenzwerten für Stickstoffdioxid in der Außenluft können nicht die gleichen Maßstäbe angelegt werden wie für Arbeitsplatzgrenzwerte (Ableitung aus der Maximalen Arbeitsplatz-Konzentration, MAK). Der MAK-Wert für NO2 ist eine wissenschaftliche Empfehlung der ständigen Senatskommission zur Prüfung gesundheitsschädlicher Arbeitsstoffe der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft und entspricht in seiner Höhe ebenfalls dem Arbeitsplatzgrenzwert (AGW) der Gefahrstoffverordnung (GefStoffV). Arbeitsplatzgrenzwerte gelten nur für Arbeitende an Industriearbeitsplätzen und im Handwerk, bei denen aufgrund der Verwendung oder Erzeugung bestimmter Arbeitsstoffe eine erhöhte Stickstoffdioxid-Belastung zu erwarten ist.
https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/unterschied-zwischen-aussenluft
Dein Vergleich war auf Stammtischniveau, ohne jede wissenschaftliche Grundlage.