Allergies Worse Than Ever? Blame Global Warming
Allergy sufferers like to claim — in between sniffles — that each spring’s allergy season is worse than the last. But this year, they might actually be right.
Thanks to an unusually cold and snowy winter, followed by an early and warm spring, pollen counts are through the roof in much of the U.S., especially in the Southeast, which is already home to some of the most allergenic cities in the country. A pollen count — the number of grains of pollen in a cubic meter of air — of 120 is considered high, but in Atlanta last week the number hit 5,733, the second highest level ever recorded in the city. (See a 1992 TIME cover on why allergies are nothing to sneeze at.)
The bad news is that in a warmer world, allergies are likely to get worse — and that’s going to cost sufferers and the rest of us. A new report released on Wednesday by the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) found that global warming will likely increase pollen counts in the heavily populated eastern section of the country and that the effect of climate change could push the economic cost of allergies and asthma well above the current $32 billion price tag. “The latest climate science makes it clear that allergies could get much worse,” says Amanda Staudt, a climate scientist at NWF and the author of the report. “I really think this should be a wake-up call.”
Here’s how it works: higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere generally speed plant growth, while warmer temperatures mean that spring — and with it, allergy season — arrives earlier. Spring-like conditions in the East are already arriving on average 14 days earlier than just 20 years ago. (See why allergies are on the rise in children.)
===========================================
Gosh, it HAS to be CO2, it couldn’t possibly be related to changes in rainfall, sunlight, available nutrients (like fertilizer runoff) or winds. No, only CO2 can make weeds grow like crazy. Apparently the Times writer never heard of Liebigs Law
Read the rest of the story here, then wipe your nose on your sleeve.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@Martin Brumby (04:19:39) :
“@RichieP (02:58:48)
C’mon! I’m not having that!
I’m no fan of the 3 Stooges but they were absolute geniuses compared to our fearless “leaders”!
Better looking, too!”
My profound apologies, no offence intended. Perhaps I should not have capitalised it in the way I did, as the three “leaders” are in any case stooges in the literal sense:
stooge (stj)
n.
1. The partner in a comedy team who feeds lines to the other comedian; a straight man.
2. One who allows oneself to be used for another’s profit or advantage; a puppet.
davidmhoffer (21:23:55)
Hi, I posted a reply (kind of) to this question on Jo Nova’s site yesterday. Antony has already pointed out that factors other than CO2 are generally limiting plant growth (nitrogen more often than not) so increasing CO2 into the battleground that plants usually have to survive in won’t make the huge improvement shown by plants grown in nutrient rich, moist, sunny, heated greenhouses with CO2 enrichment. I’ve copied & pasted the rest of my reply below (very lazy – sorry)
“For me, one of the key pieces of evidence that we’re living on a planet with CO2 levels currently at the very bottom of the normal range is that a whole new group of plants evolved several million years ago specifically to cope with it. They developed a new method of photosynthesis called C4 which permits greater water efficiency and the ability to photosynthesise in higher temperatures at greatly reduced CO2 levels. Just do a Wiki on ‘C4 photosynthesis’. An even more robust adaption called CAM was evolved by plants like cacti which we now see living in deserts. But even these can’t grow in the Sahara – no water, no nitrogen, no nothing.
Despite a probable increase in net biomass with increasing CO2 concentrations, there could be a loss in plant biodiversity as the big greedy plants with a high relative growth rate totally out-compete everything else. This happens anywhere you add loads of any nutrients of any sort to an ecosystem and upset the delicate battle for resources. The analogy is similar to acid soils (lots of nutrients) which are generally species poor and dominated by big greedy hooligan-like plants vs alkaline soils which are nutrient poor but very species rich.”
So there is indeed a suggestion that more ancient plants are now living in a world where CO2 levels are much lower than when they first evolved.
As a couple previous commentators (e.g. QZR, Daniel H) note, a large part of the current allergy epidemic has more to do with the poorly thought out choice of street trees than any change in atmospheric CO2 or slight changes in Spring blooming time. Lots of other complications that have nothing to do with climate and everything to do with how our immune systems mature and operate also seem to be involved. But who cares about trying to understand or solve problems? Our rulers just need hype to keep us confused and following orders, and AGW works well enough for that.
All this talk about an insignificant rise in CO2…
I live in metro Atlanta. After over three years of draught conditions, we were drenched with over 69 inches of rain last year (almost 20 inches above average), that greatly replenished the groundwater levels.
Of course plant life rebounded this year. I have flowers coming back that I haven’t seen in two years.
And pollen would not be nearly as bad if pine forests hadn’t been cut down, homes built, and landscaped yards featuring a multitude of trees, bushes, grasses, and flowers installed. In a virgin pine forest, you have pine trees spaced out, a thick floor of pine needles, and not much other vegetation.
CO2? Yeah, that might have helped…a little. Global warming? Considering that we had record cold Winter temps, and normal Spring temps, not so much.
RichieP (04:41:50),
If you’re going to use old timey language like ‘stooges,’ then that makes the taxpayers the chumps.
[Liked your 02:58:48 essay, BTW.]
@Smokey (05:01:31) :
“If you’re going to use old timey language like ’stooges,’ then that makes the taxpayers the chumps.”
No change there then! (Though please note I speak only for the UK.)
Do you expect any different from Time/CNN? This has two things going for it that makes CNN like it. The first is that is bad news and can somehow being blamed on us humans. The second is that it affects Atlanta. This wouldn’t be news to CNN if it didn’t affect Atlanta. I stopped watching CNN when they spent 30 minutes talking about a severe thunderstorm in Atlanta, like all of America is interested in what happens in that city. That was many years ago. I haven’t watched since.
Here is what CNN isn’t telling you. The pollen this year came a perfect time. I live in North Carolina and yes the pollen was really bad here. It was bad because the southeast went from cold and rainy to warm and sunny. We haven’t had a rainstorm of note in weeks. When it rains, the pollen is washed out of the air and off the trees. It was a combination of coincidences, and not AGW, that caused pollen to be so bad this year.
But a combination of coincidences is not bad news and it does not get ratings. Ah, but when global warming is causing bad pollen … that does get ratings. People have short memories, and who can remember what the pollen was like many years ago? This is a perfect chance to exploit that. Did you expect any less from CNN? I’ve heard some people call it “Constant Negative News”, others “Communist News Network”. CNN lost me as a viewer many years ago with their narcissistic negative news.
I’m trying to find a list of things which are *not* harmed, destroyed or exacerbated by global warming (erm, climate change). I’m sure, by now, it’s a very short list on the verge of extinction.
I have my own theory on allergy increases, and it has nothing to do with global warming causing a greater increase in trees, weed, etc.
Consider our behavioral changes over the past few decades, the attempt to live in a safe, sterile environment, and we’ll see that when exposed to the harsh realities of the great outdoors we are not able to cope as well as we were.
The bell-curve of human endurance (mentally and physically) has flattened, and continues to flatten. We are seeing humans pushing the boundaries of achievement, but at the same time, the low end of the scale is seeing an increase in the number of people ill-equipped to cope. We are, on the whole, distinctly as average as we were hundreds of years ago.
So Time Magazine is admitting that more CO2 is good for plants! That’s a very good start IMO. The fact that Time even acknowledges the connection between allergies and parents sheltering their newborn babies inside an industrial clean room environment underscores a chink in their blind obdience to the alarmist crowd.
Yes it’s true, whoever suffers from pollen allergies will likely suffer more as plants become HEALTHIER thanks to CO2, (let them retreat back into the clean room their parents put them in when they were babies…), but there no room for alarmists to argue that the allergic reaction itself is the result of AGW. It clearly is not. It would be like blaming flooding for people not knowing how to swim.
Just wanted to say that the original Three Stooges gave value for the money that was freely given to them…
As any landscaper knows, stressing a plant will make it stronger. This winter caused a lot of stress on all plants. Some couldn’t handle the stress and died, i.e. my coconut palms and even my bougainvilleas. But those that could handle it have grown back bigger and stronger. The leaves on the plumbagos and oak trees are the largest I have seen since living at this location. My citrus trees have enormous amounts of buds this spring, the most I have seen on these trees. We also have had a wet spring which is definitely a contributing factor.
Like a human muscle, when plants are stressed and fed properly they respond favorably.
I don’t suffer from allergies but I often use them as an excuse to leave work early and arrive late the next day. So to the NWF I just have one thing to say:
BRING IT ON!
And that goes for Gore too.
I too read the rest of the “Time” article. Not only does it assert that pines do not produce pollen, It bases its springtime allergy claims – in amazingly precise terms – on increased production of, and increased allergic response to, “spring ragweed”. In fact, all ragweeds (genus Ambrosia) bloom in late summer and in the fall. This story is made out of whole cloth.
RESULTS: Farmers’ children had lower prevalences of hay fever (adjusted odds ratio = 0. 52, 95% CI 0.28-0.99), asthma (0.65, 0.39-1.09), and wheeze (0.55, 0. 36-0.86) than their peers not living in an agricultural environment. The reduction in risk was stronger for children whose families were running the farm on a full-time basis as compared with families with part-time farming activity. Among farmers’ children increasing exposure to livestock was related to a decreasing prevalence of atopic diseases (aOR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Factors related to environmental influences on a farm such as increased exposure to bacterial compounds in stables where livestock is kept prevent the development of allergic disorders in children.
Some of the worst allergy patterns are among city dwellers. Inside the home is bad. Farm homes without the UHI effect have their windows open more often at night. Kids raised on raw milk on the farm also much lower allergy problems and asthma rates. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10651770?ordinalpos=107&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
This allergy suffering is miserable. The city scientist that really doesn’t do research and writes stuff is worse. Out in the country is where pollens thrive.
Conclusions: Our study adds to the evidence that a farm childhood in combination with current livestock farming protects against allergic disorders. This effect was found for both organic and
conventional farmers
http://oem.bmj.com/content/64/2/101.abstractentional farmers.
The Liberal media writes anything they want and really doesn’t even do google research.
I’ll tell you what else is doing good – mosquitoes!
The other day, I found an old rake that had fallen over, and the plastic head was holding about a quarter inch of water, and at least 2 dozen wigglers were swimming around in it!
Then yesterday I had a duke-it-out with about the biggest, hairiest one I have ever seen. You know, you smack ’em and you smack ’em, and they don’t squish! Right here, at the computer.
Watch the skies people!
How is our Main Stream Media different from Pravda? Government cheerleading all the time. Leading to…….”we need to control you more”. This insidious malfeasance is the greatest threat to democracy.
And only a small percentage of people even recognize that it’s happening. It is why when you try to explain something to someone you feel as though you have to grab them by the shoulders and shake them. They are brain dead zombies of the MSM propaganda.
It’s very scary. Seriously, it is.
I think Henry has something – I grew up on a nut/rice farm, and I can stand in the orchard during the bloom and feel nothing. My husband and son puff up like blowfish – their eyelids puff up so big their eyelashes look like little spines sticking out. They sneeze and get dizzy – it’s a real problem. But I can stand out there all day and not even sniffle.
And you know what – the mosquitoes don’t really bother me the way they bother some people either. I don’t like them and worry they might carry disease, but the bites don’t swell up or itch like they do some people.
More evidence that a farm childhood is superior 🙂
Never turn down an inadvertant gift from a foolish enemy:
Pollen is literally the seeds of Life. Here the Warmistas are claiming that Life is going to benefit from CO2 induced changes. Corollaries not mentioned: more food for the hungary…..more, not less, biodiversity in a warm era with abundant plant food.
Under the sign: “Happiness is a warm Planet!”, the Truth will be found.
Typo, sorry, more food for the “hungry”…. Hungary may have more food for its hungry people, as well.
KW
Typical propaganda from the sophists with an agenda. I have suffered from pollen and dust related sensitivities since a child. It is true that they have gotten more annoying as I have grown younger (at age 50 I started counting backwards so am now only 33). This increased annoyance is highly correlated to many things; the state of the global climate less so then living in the forest and sneezing in the presence of spruce pollen every spring, however. But then correlation is not causation, is it.
Time to tax pollen! Where do I get my pollen offsets for my acres of trees?
no early spring around here. in fact, opening day is likely to see 100% ice cover on local lakes, as opposed the normal 100% fishing boat cover.
at least in the southwest, increased pollen this year would more likely be caused by the very wet winter’s concomitant plant growth.
speaking only from actual observation of course, no models or projections on which to rely
There are two strands in this report, in the wrong order. The NWF report can only be based on 2009 [or earlier] data, and as such could make some kind of sense :
Using 2009 Data :
A ‘new’ report by the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) found that global warming will likely increase pollen counts in the heavily populated eastern section of the country. Higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere generally speed plant growth, while warmer temperatures mean that spring — and with it, allergy season — arrives earlier. Spring-like conditions in the East are already arriving on average 14 days earlier than just 20 years ago.
NWF should also conclude that a warmer planet encourages plant growth, which absorbs more CO2 and leads to cooling.
Unfortunately the winter of 2009/10 has changed all that, making the report outdated, particularly the idea of spring arriving earlier!
The reality of 2010 :
The long cold winter delayed the onset of spring. Instead of the normal staggered growth of various plant species, when the warm weather eventually arrived all the plants grew at the same time, leading to unusually high pollen counts.
The question is whether last winter is the new ‘normal’. The solar driven climate model suggests ‘yep’!
Even some of the ever flexible AGW supporters are now factoring in 50 years of a cooler Earth, though also saying that, when you least expect it, AGW will jump out of the shadows and HACK YOU TO DEATH! In the best slasher movie scenario, you will never be able to kill off AGW, it will always be lurking in the shadows, ready to pounce. [Please keep sending the cheques!]