Previously, we explored the potential effects of air pollution on Olympic athletes’ respiratory health through studying two key pollutants: ozone and particulate matter. While we might now know the health risks that these athletes face, this then begets the question of whether they can be trained to adapt to these risks and maintain their sporting standards.
Achieving this is possible, at least in theory. As argued by Mullins (2018), athletes with recent exposure to high ozone levels experience the acclimatisation effect, where they develop weaker respiratory complications in high-ozone environments. This corresponds with Sandford, Stellingwerff and Koehle’s (2020) findings that endurance runners from high-ozone environments display more consistent performance as they have become desensitised to irritant exposure. Such phenomena thus suggest that to minimise respiratory irritation and optimise performance, athletes can engage in short ozone adaptation training sessions to pre-acclimatise themselves. While this is inapplicable to particulate matter as there is no identifiable threshold below which respiratory illnesses do not develop, particulate matter exposure is harmless unless it exceeds the guideline value of 15 micrograms per cubic metre (World Health Organisation, 2021).
Figure 1: An infographic outlining how Olympic athletes should train for competitions in high-ozone environments (Sandford, Stellingwerff and Koehle, 2020)
Nevertheless, such adaptation strategies have proven ineffective as they jeopardise the health of high-risk athletes, specifically those with asthma. As reported by Burns et al. (2015), asthma is a chronic respiratory disorder that affects approximately 10% of athletes, and mostly those in endurance sports due to vigorous respiratory activity. It is precisely this correlation between sports intensity and asthma occurrence that explains why — despite the well-established nature of asthma treatment methods — pollution adaptation is not a foolproof solution. While adaptation training sessions admittedly require lower sports intensity than actual competitions in consideration of athlete safety exposure (Sandford, Stellingwerff and Koehle, 2020), they also involve longer training periods to facilitate the stabilisation of inflammatory symptoms. This is highly unsafe for asthmatic endurance athletes, as prolonged exposure to pollutants — even in small amounts — can exacerbate exercise-induced bronchospasms (Braniš and Vetvicka, 2010) and strain the lungs. Consequently, this increases the severity of asthma attacks, making it difficult for athletes to train and eventually compete properly.
In fact, these concerns turned into reality during the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games, when top British track athlete Steve Ovett collapsed from pollution-induced asthma during the 800 metre finals. Despite Ovett’s ozone exposure in Britain, where heavy coal use for industrial activity sparked record-high ozone levels (National Atmospheric Emission Inventory, 2010), the pre-acclimatisation effect was not observed as the severe buildup of smog in Los Angeles (Elsom, 2016) significantly increased aerobic demand. This, coupled with the high level of sports intensity required for short-distance sprinting, resulted in severe bronchospasms that triggered Ovett’s asthma.
British elite runner Steve Ovett (first from left) competing at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games, moments before he collapsed from a pollution-induced asthma attack (Walters, 2012)
While Ovett eventually recovered and went on to compete at other mega sports events, many Olympic athletes remain fearful of pollution-induced health hazards, with some nearly dropping out of the Olympic Games. This reinforces the critical need for host cities to manage air pollution during the Olympic Games, so that athletes can compete without fear of health complications and even break Olympic records. After all, as Elsom (2016) warns, athletes cannot perform their best under polluted conditions, no matter how comprehensive their adaptation strategies are.
References
Braniš, M., & Vetvicka, J. (2010). PM10, ambient temperature and relative humidity during the XXIX Summer Olympic Games in Beijing: were the athletes at risk?. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 10(2), 102-110. https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2009.09.0055
Burns, J., Mason, C., Mueller, N., Ohlander, J., Zock, J. P., Drobnic, F., … & European Community Respiratory Health Survey. (2015). Asthma prevalence in Olympic summer athletes and the general population: an analysis of three European countries. Respiratory Medicine, 109(7), 813-820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2015.05.002
Elsom, D. (2016, August). Los Angeles 1984: The Olympics under a cloud. Geographical. https://geographical.co.uk/places/cities/item/1855-los-angeles-1984-the-olympics-under-a-cloud
Mullins, J. T. (2018). Ambient air pollution and human performance: Contemporaneous and acclimatization effects of ozone exposure on athletic performance. Health economics, 27(8), 1189-1200. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3667
National Atmospheric Emission Inventory. (2010). UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970 to 2008. https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/documents/reports/cat07/1009030925_2008_Report_final270805.pdf
Sandford, G. N., Stellingwerff, T., & Koehle, M. S. (2020). Ozone pollution: a ‘hidden’ environmental layer for athletes preparing for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic & Paralympics. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55(4), 189-190. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-103360
Walters, M. (2012, June 7). Coe v Ovett: A battle of Britain fought out behind the Iron Curtain. [Online image]. Mirror. https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other-sports/athletics/london-2012-looking-back-at-coe-865439
World Health Organisation. (2021, September 22). Ambient (outdoor) air pollution. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ambient-(outdoor)-air-quality-and-health
