This is almost too stupid to comment on, but I’ll do my best. First the headline and story excerpt:
GLOBAL WARMING Warming of the Earth’s climate system and related increasing concentrations of greenhouse gasses are causing some eye disorders, writes Maria Anguita.
Two years ago, retired teacher Vera started experiencing eye discomfort, irritation and crusting of the eyelids. She was prescribed a short course of antibiotics for what her doctor suspected was a simple eye infection, but several months later she was still having problems.
“My eyes felt constantly gritty and dry, and my lids were red and flaky. I was treated for a range of eye conditions, but nothing seemed to make a difference,” says Vera.
Many trips to eye specialists later, she was diagnosed with chronic blepharitis, an inflammation of the eyelid, of unknown cause. And, after trial and error with different treatments, she now has a routine that keeps her discomfort and pain in check. However, some days her eyes flare up for no apparent reason: “I just wish I knew why I keep getting this,” she says.
It may be difficult to pin Vera’s symptoms to global warming, but scientists all over the world agree that increased levels of ultraviolet radiation reaching the surface of the Earth, resulting from ozone depletion at high altitude, and a toxic mix of air pollutants are responsible for serious eye disorders.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), of the 18 million people worldwide who have cataract-related diseases, 5% are directly attributable to UV radiation. UVA light, a component of UV radiation, stimulates the over-production of damaging oxygen-free radicals responsible for the clouding of the lens, typical of cataracts.
Last year researchers at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, started gathering data for what is to date the largest study into the link between global warming and eye health.
Full story here
============================================================
Yegads. The stupid here, it burns like magnesium.
It’s funny really, the claim on the face is that 0.7C of warming over a century is causing a deterioration of eye health. We have humans in every climate zone of the planet, living with temperatures ranging from sub-zero in Antarctica to 120F+ in the deserts of Iraq.
Hell, the temperature changes 0.7C just walking from room to room in my house!
They are trying to blame the warming as a trigger for a whole host of secondary pollution issues, and those make itchy watery eyes. Never mind the big advances in air pollution control in the last 30 years…unless you live in China.
h/t to Tom Nelson
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It is a conflation of CO2 induced global warming with CFC induced ozone depletion.
Completely separate issues.
Mind you, I think the truth is that both the late 20th century warming AND the upper atmosphere ozone reductions were actually solar induced and nothing to do with CO2 or CFCs.
The widely commented (and increasingly accepted) top down solar effect on the atmosphere would affect both ozone quantities and the vertical temperature profile.
This will no doubt be included in the health benefit and savings estimated figure thrown out by the EPA to justify regulating CO2.
AGW causes flatulence!
Treat Vera for a simple eye problem, treat Maria Anguita for verbal flatulence!
Medical doctors are finding it more and more difficult to practice. With overhead reaching obscene levels, it was only a matter of time before they hitched themselves to the CAGW gravy train.
When pressed hard enough with evidence, most high profile warmists seem willing to admit that warming has stalled and claim that it is a temporary occurrance which does not invalidate the theory. But when not being pressed–when in need of a continuous warming to be the cause of a frightening effect–they have no problem pretending that the temperature decline is absent (one might say, hidden). And we are told that we are “anti-science” if we don’t buy in to this kind of three-card-monte reasoning.
Again, the completely idiotic premise that the global temperature (without CO2) is immutable, unchanging, constant. Remove that premise and the entire house of cards collapses.
I was wondering why I was having the same problem Someone said it was just old age. Silly me global warming of course don’t know why I didn’t think of it earlier. /sarc What a bunch of crock!!
This makes sense, has all of the necessary ingredients, scary personal risk, tied to pollution – funding ‘scientific’ study to the rescue – obviously could have been avoided if the world would just allow the UN to tax carbon. /sarc
There is a lot of money being thrown around related to “Global Warming.” And the only way eye doctors can get a piece of it is to find some links with eye diseases. Trust me, links WILL be found.
Shades of the “Ozone Hole is Growing” panic of the 80’s. . . .
I was always amused by those arguments because. . . .none of the scare mongers ever, ever managed to state just what the amount of UV radiation reaching the earth was — and if it had changed at all over the decades.
At least the CO2 warmist alarmists are able to report what the CO2 is and has been, and what they think it will be. . . . . . . .
So. . .does anyone actually know if UV radiation has gone up anywhere in the world?
The UV thing is easily debunked too. Plenty of people lived in the mountains before sunglasses were invented – they didn’t suffer excessively from cataracts or other eye problems.
I was diagnosed with blepharitis about 30 years ago by an ophthalmologist who also had the problem. The problem is caused by bacteria collecting under one’s eyelids, and is controlled by washing under the eyelids, daily, with a non-irritating soap like Johnson’s Baby Shampoo.
Climate has nothing to do with the problem.
This reaction is almost certainly due to a component of dinosaur farts.
“Last year researchers at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, started gathering data for what is to date the largest study into the link between global warming and eye health.
More than 5,000 people across north-east India are being screened for eye disease and are asked to fill in a questionnaire on how much time they spend outdoors. The results will then be compared with regional meteorological data.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/raconteur-media/climate-change-is-harming_b_1498982.html
xxxxxxxxxxx
It’s a wonder anyone can see with the soot in India
I am sure this ‘dry eye’ issue will be in the IPCCs 5th ass-essment report. However, don’t expect any quantitative comments on the Svensmark hypothesis.
“Last year researchers at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, started gathering data for what is to date the largest study into the link between global warming and eye health.”
It’s easy to be the largest study when you’re the first. But there is one way in which the word choice here is probably more accurate that author intended: it is not a study into the *possibility* of a link between global warming and eye health but into the link which is presupposed to exist. Like so much else in this pathological doctrine, conclusions must be accepted to justify the propositions.
The article completely missed the massive explosion of computer screens and mobile devices we now stare at on a almost constant basis which causes no small amount of eye strain.
I wonder if the CO2 levels in her bedroom increase significantly overnight (if windows and doors kept closed, obviously) – surely all that exhaled CO2 builds up and causes massive irrititation? /sarc
Of course things like increased longevity over the last century by about 20 years, better record keeping and availability of doctors has absolutely nothing to do with this either.
Causation: Any positive indicator that fits your model.
“…Fortunately, Vera noticed that her condition improved significantly after she bought a Prius, started using recyclable grocery bags, and replaced her old incandescent light bulbs with new fluorescent bulbs.”
If you go looking for witches…
“It may be difficult to pin Vera’s symptoms to global warming, but scientists all over the world agree that increased levels of ultraviolet radiation reaching the surface of the Earth, resulting from ozone depletion at high altitude, and a toxic mix of air pollutants are responsible for serious eye disorders.”
First of all, ozone depletion and ‘a toxic mix of air pollutants’ are not related to the theory of man-made global warming in any significant way. Secondly, at the height of so-called ozone depletion, the net impact on a person was equivalent to moving less than 100 miles towards the equator. Vera could just try moving a little towards the poles and see if that helps (sarc). Third, UV radiation may be linked to cataracts, but Vera does not have cataracts, just irritated eyes and eye lids. Fourth, the symptoms started two years ago, during a period of global cooling, improved pollution levels in most areas and a continued recovery of the ozone layer (something that should not be happening if humans are to blame for ozone depletion, but that is another story). Fifth, the headline of the article has nothing to do with the text. The headline could have read “More evidence pigs can fly” and would have been just as appropriate. Sixth, all the things Anthony has already mentioned.
The ignorance and irrationality in this article is staggering. Perhaps Maria Anguita was going for some kind of citation in the Guinness Book of World Records.
Easy fix – treat vitamin D deficiency (most medical doctors over look it due to ignorance). Usually, any inflammation of any kind is directly linked to chronic vitamin D deficiency (very common). Poor lady… Only if she knew about it…
I blame Global Warming for the increased stupidity in the media. It must be responsible for the catastrophic drop in ability to reason of the Journalisticus Vulgaris species, which should be declared “protected” and moved to reservations in colder climates – Siberia would be ideal.
“Hell, the temperature changes 0.7C just walking from room to room in my house!”
Oh noes! Your house is infested with the Global Warming.
You will be billed at $23 per tonne until the situation improves.
Yours,
Julia Gillard