Chiang Mai Burning Season
Is it Safe to Visit Chiang Mai during the Smoke Season with high PM2.5 Levels?
Is it Safe to Visit Chiang Mai in the Smoke Season (March/April)
When you come to Chiang Mai during Burning Season, (esp. Songkran Festival) and see the millions of people going about their daily lives without concern to the Smoke in Chiang Mai. You might wonder why so many Newspaper articles and Youtubers focus on how Safe it is
In the following article, we will examine the reasons for the Smokey season and some of the misinformed claims by some people. BUT, more importantly the Science behind the toxicity of the Smoke in Chiang Mai, it's symptoms and just how quickly the Human body will recover. So that you can decide if Visiting Chiang Mai during the Smoke/Burning season is something you should still do, or cancel your Trip
Common Incorrect Statements made about Chiang Mai and PM2.5
Air quality during Chiang Mai’s burning season is a topic that often generates strong opinions. Many of these views are shaped by personal experience, media headlines, or a natural concern about health risks. It’s understandable – air pollution is something people can see and feel, which makes it easy to form quick judgments about its impact.
However, these discussions can sometimes rely more on perception than on measured evidence. Anecdotal experiences and alarming headlines, while compelling, don’t always reflect the full picture presented in scientific research. As a result, it’s not uncommon for the risks of short-term exposure to be confused by many with long term exposure in Industrial countries.
To get a clearer and more accurate understanding, it’s important to step back from assumptions and look closely at what peer-reviewed studies and real-world measurements tell us. By doing so, we can better distinguish between widely held beliefs and evidence-based conclusions about PM2.5 exposure during Chiang Mai’s burning season.
Some Common Misinformation and Facts about Chiang Mai PM2.5
| Common Claim | Evidence-Based Context |
|---|---|
| “PM2.5 is toxic.” | PM2.5 is not a single substance but a mixture of particles. Its impact depends on composition (e.g. soot, dust, organic material). While it can carry harmful compounds, seasonal biomass smoke typically differs from industrial pollution in chemical profile and toxicity levels. In Chiang Mai the average PM2.5 concentration of 116 ± 35 and 35 ± 6 μg m−3 was found during smoke-haze (SH) periods. The average PMF-resolved contributions to PM2.5 in the SH period were the following: biomass burning (59.3 μg m−3) > secondary sulfate (26.2 μg m−3) > dust (16.1 μg m−3) > traffic (14.6 μg m−3). – Citation 1 |
| “Any exposure is dangerous.” | There is no completely risk-free level, but health effects are strongly related to dose (concentration × duration). Short-term exposure in otherwise healthy individuals is generally associated with temporary symptoms rather than long-term harm. Almost all studies (too many to reference) are done on long term exposure in Industrial toxic PM2.5 and focus mainly on elderly sick people dying more often on high pollution days |
| “Studies show PM2.5 causes serious health effects.” | Many cited studies focus on long-term exposure in heavily industrialized or urban environments. These results are not directly comparable to short-term exposure during seasonal smoke events. There are Zero studies that show short term exposure to PM2.5 in Chiang Mai is harmful. There are studies that show increased out patient visits to Chiang Mai hospitals (Citation 2). These types of studies are often used to express “Serious health Issue” despite the authors themselves pointing out that Hospital care is free to Thai’s, and that on days on high heat the numbers of out patients decrease (indicating the symptoms are not worse than the discomfort of being in the heat) |
| “A few days in smoky air will cause lasting damage.” | Current evidence suggests that short-term exposure may cause irritation and temporary inflammation, but the body can often recover once exposure ends, particularly in healthy individuals. (Citation 3 & 4) show healing after 2-4 weeks of non exposure. No one denies inhalation of smoke will cause irritation, but the body does heal! |
| “Chiang Mai’s air is among the worst in the world, so it must be extremely dangerous.” | Air quality rankings reflect short-term measurements, not cumulative exposure. A temporary spike in PM2.5 does not carry the same long-term risk as living for years in consistently polluted environments. For example the Air Quality in Bangkok over the duration of 12 months is several times more cumulative than in Chiang Mai for 1-2 months of the year. Making living in Bangkok several times more unsafe than visiting Chiang Mai. |
| “You cannot avoid exposure once you are there.” | Exposure can be significantly reduced through simple measures such as staying indoors during peak hours, using air filtration, and wearing appropriate masks when necessary. |
| “The body cannot remove PM2.5 once it is inhaled.” | The respiratory system has defense mechanisms including mucus clearance and immune cells (macrophages) that help remove particles. While not perfect, these systems support recovery after short-term exposure. Further more the daily exposure to PM2.5 has been converted to cigarette smoking as a comparison of harm. Every Non Smoker study shows a clear time scale of how quickly the body repairs itself after decades of smoking caused damage. There are studies that do the same thing for PM2.5 (seen below) but they are few at present times. |
| “All smoke exposure is the same.” | Smoke composition varies widely. Agricultural burning, wildfires, and industrial emissions produce different chemical mixtures, which can influence their relative health impact. For example insoluble/ultrafine components are often cited as the most troublesome and last element to be removed. This makes up around 2% of the smoke from agriculture (Chiang Mai), 40-60% of Industrial/Car exhaust PM2.5 and 90% of the components of cigarettes. The Term PM2.5 is a global measure which does not take into account it’s toxicity from the components that make it up |
| “If you feel fine, there is no effect.” | Some effects (like mild inflammation) may not be immediately noticeable. However, absence of symptoms during short exposure does not necessarily imply significant harm either. If you are exposed to bad air you are being affected to some degree. The degree however, is not as bad as many headlines would have you believe. |
| “Lung Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease death rates in Chiang Mai are higher than Average” | Data suggests that Northern Thailand broadly follows national patterns rather than showing dramatically elevated shares of deaths from major chronic diseases. Globally, Cardiovascular Disease accounts for about 310–320 deaths per 1000 deaths, whereas Thailand (including the north) is typically lower at ~230–300 per 1000 deaths. For Lung Cancer, the global average is about ~60 per 1000 deaths, compared to ~50–70 per 1000 deaths in Thailand, which is broadly similar. (Refer Below for various Citations) |
| “Tourists should completely avoid Chiang Mai during smoky season.” | This depends on individual risk tolerance and health status. For many healthy travelers, a short visit may be manageable with precautions, while more sensitive individuals may prefer to avoid peak periods. If you are coming for the views, it is probably best to avoid this time of year. If you are coming for the many other reasons, the smog will not disrupt that experience at all. |
An Important Thing to know....
This article does not dispute the well-established evidence that long-term exposure to elevated PM2.5 levels can have serious health effects, particularly in heavily industrialized environments and among vulnerable populations.
That body of research is widely accepted and supported by global health organizations. However, the purpose of this article is more specific: to examine whether it is safe to visit Chiang Mai during its burning season, where exposure is typically short-term and seasonal rather than continuous. Almost every study people cite to show that short term exposure to high PM2.5 levels in Chiang Mai is in reality a study that shows an increased number of deaths of people about to die from an existing condition dying on highly pollution days. This effect is typically less than .5% per 10 μg per cubic meter.
By focusing on real-world data and scientific studies related to short-term exposure, measured in days to weeks rather than years; this article aims to provide a clearer, evidence-based perspective to help travelers make informed decisions about visiting during this period.
PM2.5 Damage Recovery Timeline after Exposure
The following table with references has been made primarily with studies that measure the effects of the body’s ability to heal PM2.5 damage from Industrial Smoke after months of exposure. Since no data exists on the type of particles tat make up Chiang Mai smoke (60% plant matter) and most visitors will only be here for a few days to weeks – it is safe to assume the recovery time is faster
| Time After Exposure Ends | What Happens in the Body | Scientific Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Within Hours | Reduction in pollutant intake. Early decrease in airway irritation begins. | Removal of exposure stops ongoing oxidative stress and inflammatory signaling. Scientific Reports (2020) |
| 24–48 Hours | Inflammation begins to decline. Blood vessel (endothelial) function starts improving. | Rapid cardiovascular improvements observed after reduced air pollution exposure. Circulation Journal (American Heart Association) |
| 3–7 Days | Reduction in respiratory symptoms. Immune system clears inhaled particles. | Airway inflammation decreases and macrophage clearance increases after exposure ends. Environmental Health Perspectives |
| 1–2 Weeks | Significant recovery of lung inflammation. Oxidative stress markers decline. | Measurable recovery within ~10–15 days after high PM2.5 exposure. Environmental Pollution (2023) |
| 2–4 Weeks | Continued improvement in lung function. Microbiome begins returning to normal. | Short-term exposure causes reversible biological disruption in humans. PubMed Study (2023) |
| 1–3 Months | Lung tissue repair continues. Most inflammation resolved in healthy individuals. | Lung repair mechanisms restore tissue after pollutant injury. Journal of Hazardous Materials (2023) |
| 3–6 Months | Full recovery possible in healthy individuals. Lung structure and immune balance normalize. | Longitudinal evidence shows resolution of PM2.5-induced lung injury after exposure stops. Journal of Hazardous Materials (2023) |
The Reality of Short-Term PM2.5 Exposure
What can we Determine about Visiting During Chiang Mai Burning Session?
During the worst month of Chiang Mai’s smog and smoke season, the average exposure of AQI PM2.5 is around 80-120 in March and 70-100 in April. There are several days where this number will reach from 200+ during April, and this is reported in world news as the week (or two weeks) that Chiang Mai is the worlds most polluted city. However the raining season starts at the end of April and usually the last week is generally clean air, which reduces the average for the month.
For most of the days you visit, you will be exposed to the harm of smoking 5-10 cigarettes a day – during the period of your duration of stay.
For healthy travelers:
Short visits (a few days to a couple weeks) are unlikely to cause lasting harm
You may experience temporary irritation or fatigue
The body will generally recover after leaving the polluted environment
Higher-risk groups:
Asthmatics
Elderly travelers
People with heart or lung conditionsThese groups should be more cautious, as short-term exposure can trigger real health events
What PM2.5 actually does in the body
PM2.5 refers to particles smaller than 2.5 microns—so small they can penetrate deep into the lungs and even enter the bloodstream .
Once inhaled, they:
- Reach the alveoli (gas-exchange areas)
- Trigger inflammation and oxidative stress
- Can circulate systemically, affecting the heart and other organs
This is why air pollution is linked not just to lung irritation, but also cardiovascular effects.
Short-Term Exposure (Days to Weeks): What the Science Says
For a tourist visiting Chiang Mai during smoky season, the key concern is short-term exposure, not years of chronic exposure.
Likely short-term effects:
Eye, nose, and throat irritation
Coughing or mild breathing discomfort
Temporary reduction in lung function
Worsening of asthma or existing conditions
👉 Important nuance:
Short-term exposure does not “cause disease” in healthy individuals, but it can stress the body temporarily.
Northern Thailands Increased Death by Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease
A popular meme online is that Lung Cancer rates are twice as high in Chiang Mai than other parts of the world. This is inaccurate. There are two different measurements that people will use and confuse
1) Incidents of Lung Cancer (about 8% higher than Global Average) and
2) Lung Cancer Deaths (The same as global average)
However the number of deaths from Cardio Vascular disease is lower by 10-20%
Available data suggests that Northern Thailand broadly follows national patterns rather than showing dramatically elevated shares of deaths from major chronic diseases. Globally, Cardiovascular Disease accounts for about 310–320 deaths per 1000 deaths, whereas Thailand (including the north) is typically lower at ~230–300 per 1000 deaths. For Lung Cancer, the global average is about ~60 per 1000 deaths, compared to ~50–70 per 1000 deaths in Thailand, which is broadly similar.
While Northern Thailand experiences seasonal air pollution that can temporarily increase cardiovascular and respiratory mortality, especially during burning season, this tends to affect the timing and short-term risk of death rather than substantially changing the overall annual proportion of deaths from these diseases. Overall, the region does not show a markedly higher share of deaths from cardiovascular disease or lung cancer compared to global averages, and in the case of cardiovascular disease, the share is generally somewhat lower.
There is reason for concern that the chances of getting Lung Cancer while living long term in Chiang Mai is 8% higher than living in other places. It would also make sense that if you had this as a pre-existing condition, your chances of living longer are also increased in Chiang Mai. The number of people who do die from Lung Cancer during the burning season is higher than the rest of the year.
| Metric | Region | Men | Women | Notes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lung Cancer Incidence (per 1,000 people) | Northern Thailand (incl. Chiang Mai) | 0.38 | 0.217 | Higher incidence than global average | Sriplung et al., Thai Cancer Registry |
| Global Average | ~0.30 | ~0.15 | WHO / GLOBOCAN estimates | GLOBOCAN / WHO | |
| Lung Cancer Share of Deaths (per 1,000 deaths) | Thailand (incl. North) | ~50–70 | Broadly similar to global average | GLOBOCAN / WHO | |
| Global Average | ~60 | Global baseline | GLOBOCAN / WHO | ||
| Cardiovascular Disease Share of Deaths (per 1,000 deaths) | Thailand (incl. North) | ~230–300 | Lower than global average | WHO Global Health Observatory | |
| Global Average | ~310–320 | Leading cause of death globally | WHO Global Health Observatory | ||
Criticisms of the Studies often cited by not included in this Article
In reviewing the available literature, several studies that are frequently cited as counterpoints were carefully evaluated but ultimately not included in this analysis. This decision was based on the specific questions is coming to Chiang Mai during Burning season safe for the average tourist. Many of the studies not used focused on the damage of extended exposure and exposure to Industrial Smog such as Coal and Auto Exhaust.
Additionally many people will merely look at the title of a study and decide without reading it what the conclusion are. Often times the conclusion of people citing the studies are the opposite of the conclusions of the authors themselves. For example all of the studies are reporting that on heavy days of pollution via PM2.5 measurements – a greater number of people who are about to die from pre-existing conditions will die on these days. This type of increase is also found on hot days, cold days, holiday periods, etc. This collation can not be used as evidence that short term exposure in healthy people has any long term effects
For those who are interested in the reasons a widely cited study was not considered, the details of many are addressed below.
Ambient Particulate Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in 652 Cities 2019 : New England Journal of Medicine
While widely cited this study measured the increased in deaths over 1-2 days of a single high level exposure, and found that slight rise in daily deaths, (0.3-0.7% per 10 μg per cubic meter) particularly from heart and lung conditions, all from people with pre-existing conditions
However, several criticisms are often raised. Because the study looks at very short timeframes, some researchers argue it may capture “mortality displacement,” where frail individuals die a few days earlier than they otherwise would, rather than showing a large overall increase in deaths.
Others point out that the results rely on statistical models that can vary depending on how they are set up, which may influence the findings. There are also concerns that air quality measurements from central monitoring stations don’t perfectly reflect what individuals actually breathe, (Industrial pollution vs Agricultural pollution in Chiang Mai) and that other factors (like weather, behavior, or local conditions) may still affect the results. Overall, while the study suggests a real but relatively small short-term effect of pollution on mortality, these limitations mean the findings should be interpreted with some caution.
Bottomline. The study is not related to the situation in Chiang Mai and has concerns over the methods used to collect and analyses the data. Another study that shows that people with pre-existing health conditions are more likely to die on days with heavy pollution. This study is NOT about any harmful effects that are caused by Exposure to PM2.5
Cardiovascular and respiratory effects of short-term exposure to PM2.5, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2020.
In the Cardiovascular and Respiratory Effects of Short-Term Exposure to PM2.5 published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, short-term exposure (typically measured over hours to a few days) was found to be associated with increased risks of heart attacks, stroke, hospital admissions, and respiratory problems such as asthma and COPD flare-ups. Even small increases in PM2.5 levels were linked to a rise in daily deaths and acute cardiovascular events, especially in older adults and people with existing health conditions. ([American College of Cardiology][1])
However, several criticisms are commonly raised. First, the size of the effect is relatively small (often less than a 1% increase in risk per 10 µg/m³), meaning results can be sensitive to how the statistical model is built. Second, like many air pollution studies, it is observational, so it shows association rather than clear causation, and may still be influenced by unmeasured factors such as weather, behavior, or other pollutants.
Bottomline: Another study that shows that people with pre-existing health conditions are more likely to die on days with heavy pollution. This study is NOT about any harmful effects that are caused by Exposure to PM2.5
Critical review of health impacts of wildfire smoke exposure, Environmental Health Perspectives, 2016
This Study is often cited to demonstrate that Agricultural burning PM2.5 is as dangerous as Industrial PM2.5. But the study makes no such comparison and indeed the authors conclude “More research is needed to determine whether wildfire smoke exposure is consistently associated with cardiovascular effects, specific causes of mortality, birth outcomes, and mental health outcomes. Research into which populations are most susceptible to health effects from wildfire smoke exposure is also needed to inform public health planning for future wildfires”
Bottomline: Study shows that people with pre-existing conditions are more likely to have negative effects and die during pollution during wild fires
PM2.5 to Cigarette Damage Comparison
The comparison between PM2.5 exposure and cigarette smoking has become a widely shared way to communicate air pollution risk to the public. This approach was popularized by organizations such as Berkeley Earth, which developed an “air pollution equivalent” calculator, and has since been adopted or referenced by groups like the World Health Organization and the United States Environmental Protection Agency in public communication contexts.
The comparison typically estimates how many cigarettes a person would need to smoke to receive a similar dose of particulate matter based on PM2.5 concentration levels. While this framing is effective for illustrating relative exposure, it simplifies complex differences in toxicity, as cigarette smoke contains a far higher concentration of carcinogens and is delivered directly and repeatedly to the lungs. As a result, most scientists emphasize that the comparison should be understood as a rough communication tool rather than a literal equivalence in health risk.
Visiting Chiang Mai during the Smokey Season is the same as smoking this many Cigarettes
| PM2.5 Level (µg/m³) | Approx. Cigarette Equivalent (per day) | Context |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | ~0.5 cigarettes | Typical WHO guideline level (annual average) |
| 25 | ~1 cigarette | Moderate pollution / above recommended limits |
| 50 | ~2 cigarettes | Common during mild pollution events |
| 100 | ~4 cigarettes | Unhealthy for sensitive groups |
| 150 | ~6 cigarettes | Unhealthy air quality (AQI ~150+) |
| 250 | ~10 cigarettes | Very unhealthy / severe pollution events |
| 500 | ~20 cigarettes (≈1 pack) | Extreme pollution (rare but possible during peak burning season) |
How Fast does the Body Recover from Chiang Mai Burning Season?
The Body’s Natural Defense and Recovery Mechanisms
The human body is a remarkable thing. It recovers from injury at a very quick pace, and has evolved with numerous mechanisms for regeneration. In particular regarding visiting Chiang Mai during the Burning season there are:
1. Physical filtration (upper airways)
Nose hairs, mucus, and airway linings trap larger particles
Some PM2.5 still bypasses these defenses due to its size
2. Immune response
Macrophages (immune cells) engulf particles
This triggers inflammation—but also cleanup
3. Lung repair mechanisms
Research shows that even after short-term exposure, the lungs can:
Activate repair cells in the alveoli
Regenerate damaged tissue
Resolve inflammation after exposure ends
Some studies show recovery within weeks after exposure stops
Comparisons to Bodies Repair after Stop Smoking to Visiting Chiang Mai during Smokey Season.
When we examine the science, there is strong evidence of how safe visiting Chiang Mai during the smoke season is. For a healthy person there is little issue with short term exposure to the PM2.5 Smog in Chiang Mai. But what about Long term exposure? Many people live in Chiang Mai and experience the dangers of the smoke on a yearly basis.
Again there are no studies that have been done to answer this question. There are many studies done on the dangers of living non strop on health in Chinese and Indian cities. There are studies that show a higher statistic percentage of people in Northern Thailand dying of Cardio Vascular disease. But nothing about short term exposure and a link creating these conditions.
Let’s then, continue to compare the Chiang Mai Burning Season with smoking cigarettes. Because there has been an incredible amount of studies done on smoking and smoking cessation. We can safely assume that, for most people it takes about 30 years of smoking a pack a day, before the damage it causes shows up in a life quality reducing way. For the total period of time of the AQI bad air warnings in Chiang Mai over the 2 months burning season …. that’s about, smoking 6 packs a month for 2 months.
The following chart is widely accepted of how quickly the human body repairs itself when someone stops smoking. It takes 1-5 years for the chance of death from heart disease to be the same as a non smoker. About 10 years from the chance of death from lung cancer to return to that of a non smoker.
| Time After Stopping Smoking | Type of Repair | What Happens in the Body |
|---|---|---|
| 20 Minutes | Cardiovascular Stabilization | Heart rate and blood pressure begin to return toward normal levels. |
| 12–24 Hours | Carbon Monoxide Clearance | Carbon monoxide levels in the blood drop significantly, improving oxygen delivery. |
| 2–7 Days | Circulation & Sensory Recovery | Nicotine is eliminated; taste and smell begin to improve. |
| 2–4 Weeks | Lung Function Improvement | Circulation improves and lung function begins to increase, making physical activity easier. |
| 1–3 Months | Respiratory Repair | Cilia (tiny hair-like structures in the lungs) recover, improving the ability to clear mucus and particles. |
| 3–9 Months | Reduced Respiratory Symptoms | Coughing and shortness of breath decrease as lung capacity continues to improve. |
| 1 Year | Heart Disease Risk Reduction | Risk of coronary heart disease is about half that of a continuing smoker. |
| 5 Years | Circulatory & Stroke Risk Recovery | Risk of stroke can fall to that of a non-smoker, depending on individual factors. |
| 10 Years | Cancer Risk Reduction | Risk of lung cancer drops to about half that of a smoker; risk of other cancers also decreases. |
| 10–15 Years | Long-Term Cardiovascular Recovery | Risk of heart disease approaches that of someone who has never smoked. |
Why Does Chiang Mai have a Burning Season?
There are several reason why Chiang Mai suffers of smoke pollution for 1-2 months each year. The Most Common reasons.
- Farmers burning Crops
- Hill Tribe People Burning Forrest for Mushrooms
- Continental drift of other Fires
Compounding the situation is Geography: Chiang Mai is a Basin
Chiang Mai sits in a mountain valley, which makes things worse.
Surrounded by mountains → limits airflow
Smoke gets trapped close to the ground
Pollution accumulates instead of dispersing
1) Agricultural Burning (Primary Driver)
Farmers burn leftover crop waste (rice, corn, sugarcane) to clear fields quickly. It’s widely used because it is cheap, fast, and effective. Happens across Northern Thailand, Myanmar, and Laos because burning leftovers is free, the cost to dispose of waste without smoke equates to the same profit they make each year.
This releases large amounts of smoke and PM2.5 into the air with approximate 51% of Chiang Mai’s smoke is locally created (citation 1)
👉 Important nuance:
This is not unique to Thailand, it’s a common agricultural practice globally, but the scale and timing make it more visible here.
2) Forest Fires (Natural + Human-Caused)
Widespread forest fires, some are accidental or linked to land clearing (for Mushroom cultivation), some are intentional (e.g. hunting, forest management practices)
Dry conditions make forests highly flammable
These fires significantly increase smoke levels during peak months
For centuries many populations of stateless people exist and live in the forest areas. Because Thailand will not issue the people with Citizenship, they are unable to work, obtain loans, making the huge profit of an annual mushroom their major source of income.
3) Chiang Mai’s air is not just local.
It is not only farmers in Thailand who do not earn enough money each year to be able to remove waste in a less destructive manner. This is common with all farmers in Asia.
Smoke travels from Myanmar, Laos, and other parts of Southeast Asia
Winds can carry pollution hundreds of kilometers
Estimates suggest a large portion (30-60%) of background pollution is transboundary
👉 This is why even if local burning decreases, air quality can still be poor and other areas of Thailand like Bangkok and Phuket also have hazy days
Conclusions: Is it Safe to Visit Chiang Mai during Burning Season?
The current science says yes, it is safe for a healthy person to come to Chiang Mai during the burning season. In fact, there is no evidence that living in Chiang Mai and enduring the short term physical effects of the high PM2.5 will contribute to long term damage. What the evidence does suggest, is that for Infants, Elderly and people with pre-existing illness (especially Cardio-Vascular) the damage will be more and longer lasting.
Short term exposure to crop burning PM2.5 has a lower level of toxicity than the results from the long term studies of exposure to industrial waste PM2.5. However a percentage of the damage people are concerned about is from the size of the particle and not what type of particle it is. While we know that Chiang Mai’s AQI in burning season does not equate with toxicity levels of existing studies – it still presents a danger at the size of the particle spectrum.
The amount of damage living here is not known, it can only be guessed at. It can be guessed by what you see and how you feel about the situation politically. Or it can be guessed at using comparable data that studies already have access to. Either way, at this point it is a guess, based on science or based on emotions.
Should I cancel my visit to Chiang Mai because of the Smoke?
If you are coming here to look at the scenery and mountains, or engage in outdoor activities then probably yes. But only yes, if you are able to come at other times of the year. If this is your only opportunity then come and expect some visual limitations.
If you are thinking about cancelling your trip to Chiang Mai for safety reasons during to the high levels of pollution … Then No. While it can be uncomfortable for some, there are millions of people who don’t find it an issue worth complaining about on Facebook or making a video for clicks. Chiang Mai still has alot to offer, and well worth a small cough or eye irritation that will stop a few days after you leave – if it even manifests at all while you are in Chiang Mai.
Citations: Studies and Data related to Chiang Mai Smoke and Safety
1. Chemical composition and origins of PM2.5 in Chiang Mai (Thailand) by integrated source apportionment and potential source areas. Atmospheric Environment Volume 327, 15 June 2024, 120517 (Sarana Chansuebsri a, Petr Kolar d, and others)
2. Acute Effect of Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM2.5) on AcuteUpper Respiratory Tract Infection in Chiang Mai, Thailand. The Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand (Tanyathorn Teeranoraseth, MD, Saisawat Chaiyasate, MD, PhD¹, Kannika Roongrotwattanasiri, MD)
3. Short-term PM2.5 exposure induces transient lung injury and repair Journal of Hazardous Materials Volume 459, 5 October 2023, 132227 (Yu Li a b 1, Bencheng Lin c 1, De Hao and others)
4. Effects of short-term high-concentration exposure to PM2.5 on pulmonary tissue damage and repair ability as well as innate immune events. Environmental Pollution Volume 319, 15 February 2023, 121055 (Yu Liu a b, Jiayu Xu a b, Jiaqi Shi a b, and others)