New peer reviewed study: global warming lowers death rates

From South Dakota Politics - they should know - click

The doom and gloom, hell and high water howling seems to have hit a traffic obstacle in the form of a new paper in the UK that shows warmer weather saves lives. I really liked this part:

…they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.

 

From CO2 Science:

Lives Saved per Life Lost Due to Global Warming

Reference

Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553.

Background

The authors write that “the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,” citing the contribution of Confalonieri et al. (2007) to that document.

What was done

In an effort handsomely suited to evaluate this very-high-confidence contention of the IPCC, Christidis et al. extracted the numbers of daily deaths from all causes from death registration data supplied by the UK Office of National Statistics for men and women fifty years of age or older in England and Wales for the period 1976-2005, which they divided by daily estimates of population “obtained by fitting a fifth order polynomial to mid-year population estimates, to give mortality as deaths per million people,” after which they compared the death results with surface air temperature data that showed a warming trend during the same three-decade period of 0.47°C per decade. In addition, they employed a technique called optimal detection, which they describe as “a formal statistical methodology” that can be used to estimate the role played by human adaptation in the temperature-related changes in mortality they observed.

What was learned

As expected, during the hottest portion of the year, warming led to increases in death rates, while during the coldest portion of the year it lead to decreases in death rates. More specifically, the three scientists report that if no adaptation had taken place, there would have been 1.6 additional deaths per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year over the period 1976-2005, but there would have been 47 fewer deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 29.4, which represents a huge net benefit of the warming experienced in England and Wales over the three-decade period of warming. And when adaptation was included in the analysis, as was the case in the data they analyzed, they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.

What it means

Clearly, the IPCC’s “very-high-confidence” conclusion is woefully wrong. Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.

For more on this important topic, including results from all around the world, see the many items we have archived under the subheadings of Health Effects (Temperature) in our Subject Index.

Reference

Confalonieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. 2007. Human health. In: Parry, M.L. et al. (Eds.) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Lives Saved per Life Lost Due to Global Warming


Reference

Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553. Background

The authors write that “the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,” citing the contribution of Confalonieri et al. (2007) to that document.

What was done

In an effort handsomely suited to evaluate this very-high-confidence contention of the IPCC, Christidis et al. extracted the numbers of daily deaths from all causes from death registration data supplied by the UK Office of National Statistics for men and women fifty years of age or older in England and Wales for the period 1976-2005, which they divided by daily estimates of population “obtained by fitting a fifth order polynomial to mid-year population estimates, to give mortality as deaths per million people,” after which they compared the death results with surface air temperature data that showed a warming trend during the same three-decade period of 0.47°C per decade. In addition, they employed a technique called optimal detection, which they describe as “a formal statistical methodology” that can be used to estimate the role played by human adaptation in the temperature-related changes in mortality they observed.

What was learned

As expected, during the hottest portion of the year, warming led to increases in death rates, while during the coldest portion of the year it lead to decreases in death rates. More specifically, the three scientists report that if no adaptation had taken place, there would have been 1.6 additional deaths per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year over the period 1976-2005, but there would have been 47 fewer deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 29.4, which represents a huge net benefit of the warming experienced in England and Wales over the three-decade period of warming. And when adaptation was included in the analysis, as was the case in the data they analyzed, they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.

What it means

Clearly, the IPCC’s “very-high-confidence” conclusion is woefully wrong. Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.

For more on this important topic, including results from all around the world, see the many items we have archived under the subheadings of Health Effects (Temperature) in our Subject Index.

Reference

Confalonieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. 2007. Human health. In: Parry, M.L. et al. (Eds.) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Lives Saved per Life Lost Due to Global Warming


Reference

Christidis, N., Donaldson, G.C. and Stott, P.A. 2010. Causes for the recent changes in cold- and heat-related mortality in England and Wales. Climatic Change 102: 539-553. Background

The authors write that “the IPCC AR4 states with very high confidence that climate change contributes to the global burden of disease and to increased mortality,” citing the contribution of Confalonieri et al. (2007) to that document.

What was done

In an effort handsomely suited to evaluate this very-high-confidence contention of the IPCC, Christidis et al. extracted the numbers of daily deaths from all causes from death registration data supplied by the UK Office of National Statistics for men and women fifty years of age or older in England and Wales for the period 1976-2005, which they divided by daily estimates of population “obtained by fitting a fifth order polynomial to mid-year population estimates, to give mortality as deaths per million people,” after which they compared the death results with surface air temperature data that showed a warming trend during the same three-decade period of 0.47°C per decade. In addition, they employed a technique called optimal detection, which they describe as “a formal statistical methodology” that can be used to estimate the role played by human adaptation in the temperature-related changes in mortality they observed.

What was learned

As expected, during the hottest portion of the year, warming led to increases in death rates, while during the coldest portion of the year it lead to decreases in death rates. More specifically, the three scientists report that if no adaptation had taken place, there would have been 1.6 additional deaths per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year over the period 1976-2005, but there would have been 47 fewer deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 29.4, which represents a huge net benefit of the warming experienced in England and Wales over the three-decade period of warming. And when adaptation was included in the analysis, as was the case in the data they analyzed, they found there were only 0.7 death per million people per year due to warming in the hottest part of the year, but a decrease of fully 85 deaths per million people per year due to warming in the coldest part of the year, for a phenomenal lives-saved to life-lost ratio of 121.4.

What it means

Clearly, the IPCC’s “very-high-confidence” conclusion is woefully wrong. Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.

For more on this important topic, including results from all around the world, see the many items we have archived under the subheadings of Health Effects (Temperature) in our Subject Index.

Reference

Confalonieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., Ebi, K.L., Hauengue, M., Kovats, R.S., Revich, B. and Woodward, A. 2007. Human health. In: Parry, M.L. et al. (Eds.) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
136 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Allen
November 24, 2010 8:40 am

“Warming is highly beneficial to human health, even without any overt adaptation to it. And when adaptations are made, warming is incredibly beneficial in terms of lengthening human life span.”
Romans built around a natural hot spring in Bath centuries before science was a method. No sugar Sherlock! This paper is mischievous in the extreme and would not need to have been written had science not been so perverted by the warmists.

Douglas DC
November 24, 2010 8:42 am

Pamela-back in the cold 60’s they did exactly that-blowing up ice Dams on the
Grande Ronde near La Grande , Or. on I-84 about where the old Mill Dam was. -20 wasn’t uncommon through the 70’s . Of course I think we are headed there again. Oh another thing that I remember is being slappped by a Urine Soaked Cow’s Tail at -10F. Or getting stepped on by said cow as you set the machine on a cold, chapped udder. I verify every thing you say…Nothing like Grass fed beef, took my wife by surprise when she had her first Grass Fed T-bone, she was raised in the Midwest and used to feedlot beef.
As an aside, before the start of the Warm period n the Western US the Early 1980’s were still suffering from the Ice Age Hysteria. (Not sure its so Hysterical now) but,
there was talk of glaciation resuming in the Steens and Strawberry Mtns. Malhur
lake and Harney lake-home to a huge wildlife refuge grew to a point of joinng
together, and there was worry about ranches flooding and the city of Burns, Or.
itself. Then it turned warm, and I was privy to a “Global Warming Briefing ” by
a USFS Drone, at an Airtanker base meeting in Silver City NM. (’89)She even quoted
Hansen’s Congressional Testimony in ’88! of course this was the year after Yellowstone and the FUBAR that was. Even as a budding Tanker pilot, It was clear
that there were some in the government that wanted a “let burn’ policy in dry
years. and the mood was-” it isn’t ever going to rain/snow again, so live with it.”
Well things have we seem to have switched back to cold, and no, I am not looking
forward to that..

David L. Hagen
November 24, 2010 8:54 am

This supports the findings of the 2009 NIPCC report Climate Change Reconsidered,Ch. 9 Human Health Effects

Lester. C. Tranny
November 24, 2010 1:24 pm

Sorry Dude but your article is simply out of the world!
Come back to our earth

Kate
November 25, 2010 12:55 am

In Britain, Nine Pensioners Die of Cold Every Hour.
Thousands of pensioners died from cold-related illnesses last winter as heating bills soared and temperatures plummeted, official figures reveal. The number of deaths linked to the cold between December and March reached 25,400 in England and Wales, with another 2,760 in Scotland.
The figures are equivalent to nine deaths every hour. The total gave Britain the highest winter death rate in northern Europe, worse than much colder countries such as Finland and Sweden.
There are fears the death toll could increase this year following energy price rises which may frighten elderly people into not turning on their heating.
Michelle Mitchell, of Age UK, said: “It’s unacceptable that tens of thousands more older people die in this country every winter from the effects of the cold weather. The fact that the UK has one of the highest winter mortality rates in Europe makes it clear this is very much a home-grown problem. Behind these statistics lie deep-seated social issues, such as one in three over-60s living in houses which fail the ‘decent home’ standard.”
However, the UK death rate total fell by around 30% compared with 2008-9 because there were fewer flu outbreaks, according to the Office of National Statistics (ONS). ONS researcher Vanessa Fearn said: “Although the winter of 2009-10 was the coldest since 1995-96, excess winter mortality fell by almost a third.This may be because levels of influenza were low.”
Dot Gibson, general secretary of the National Pensioners Convention, called for more government help for the elderly. “No other section of our society is so vulnerable and treated so badly. Pensioners need more money in the form of the winter fuel allowance so that they can avoid having to decide whether to heat or eat.”
Simon Bottery, of the charity Independent Age, said 25,000 deaths was still too high. “The cost of fuel can be a real strain, and leads some older people to cut back on other basics or risk the cold,” he said.

Tim
November 25, 2010 5:00 am

Strange how biofuel causes mass starvation, escalating energy costs causes elderly deaths, vaccination causes long-term death and sterility, increased tax to pay bankers causes extreme poverty…
Got to love the new innovations.

mike g
November 25, 2010 7:55 am

Crockford
As has been documented here, and many other places, and also in their own hand via the climategate emails, there has been little to no science involved in anything the IPCC has done. It has all been a public relations exercise.

November 25, 2010 9:08 am

Interesting that in 2001 IPCC wrote the following in the health & mortality chapter:

Guest et al. (1999) compared heat-related deaths in the five major Australian cities in the period 1977-1990 with those expected under different climate change scenarios (CSIRO, 1996a) for the year 2030. They estimate that greenhouse-induced climate change would increase climate-related deaths in the summer by a small amount, but this would be more than balanced by a reduction in climate-related deaths in the winter. Overall, this resulted in a decrease of 8-12% in climate-attributable mortality under the CSIRO “high” scenario compared to a scenario with no climate changes (but expected population changes).

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=481
This passage disappeared in AR4.

Ammonite
November 25, 2010 11:52 am

Stephen Pruett says: November 23, 2010 at 4:13 pm
Tim Williams points out that the beneficial effects reported here should be balanced with the harmful effects caused by floods, droughts, hurricanes, etc. However, according to Pielke Jr. the case for increased hurricanes due to warming is non-existent.
Hi Stephen. Increased air temperature results in a much greater carrying capacity for H2O. So while the frequency question is open, the potential for major storms in a warmer world (say +3C) to cause excessive flooding is considerable. Given that engineering around the first world typically caters for 1 in (x)100 year events based on statistics from the last century it means damage to crops, infrastructure and lives as well as expensive redesigns of existing flood mitigation systems. The UK will hardly be immune in this case and the third world, as always, will suffer disproportionately.

Brian H
November 25, 2010 8:43 pm

Ammonite;
Nah. During cooling, the poles cool most. During warming, they warm most. Warming reduces contract equator to poles, and hence reduces atmospheric energy flows, and hence storminess. The LIA was wracked with violent storms. Because it got cold.

1 4 5 6