Climate Craziness of the week: Climate change as 'health threat'

Cold and flu season? High blood pressure? Nah, its climate change!

Climate-health

From the Gristians, h/t to “ham salad” and “nixfu” in WUWT Tips and Notes.

Doctors are already seeing links between climate change and their patients’ health

Now, the nation’s leading medical practitioners — with the White House behind them — are stepping forward with a diagnosis that all of us should heed, because the symptoms are becoming undeniable and the risks tremendous: Climate change is a health threat.

The nation’s public health leaders, doctors, and nurses are seeing more and more evidence — both in their patients and in epidemiological data — showing the direct and indirect links. We’re seeing more respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular disease, and heat-related deaths.

As leaders of public health institutions, we cannot overstate the importance of the commitment from President Obama and the highest levels of our government to shine a light on the health impacts of climate change.

Last month, President Obama affirmed the threat that climate change poses to the nation’s health, and committed resources to strengthening health data and to enhancing our preparedness, including targeted responses for the most vulnerable in our society. At the same time, the U.S. Global Climate Research Program released a sobering draft Climate and Health Assessment. The draft — the work of numerous experts in scientific agencies, universities, and the private sector — found that climate change is not just a future threat, but is impacting Americans every day, and that every American is at risk. Later this spring, the surgeon general will host a Climate Change and Health Summit at the White House.

Generations ago, doctors used to advise tuberculosis patients to spend time in drier or warmer climates to improve their health. In our time, it’s the climate we live in that needs the attention. The evidence, increasingly, is showing up in our patients and in our examination rooms.

Oy!

Advertisements

102 thoughts on “Climate Craziness of the week: Climate change as 'health threat'

  1. The only threat climate change makes to health is the waste of resources that could feed the hungry and treat the ill.

      • Then there is this little tid bit from
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1415127
        The abstract
        (in short…Affordable energy to run air conditioning is a must have)

        Abstract
        A cohort of 72,740 persons for whom information on household air-conditioning was available was monitored for mortality via the National Death Index from April 1980 through December 1985. A total of 2,275 deaths occurred among the members of this cohort. The basic question addressed was whether persons in households with air-conditioning experienced lower death rates during hot weather than persons in households without air-conditioning. This question was examined for both central and room air-conditioning. The analysis was based on a state-by-state approach, that cross-tabulated deaths by air-conditioning status (yes or no) and average temperature during the month of death (less than 21.2 degrees C (less than 70 degrees F) or greater than or equal to 21.2 degrees C (greater than or equal to 70 degrees F)). The Mantel-Haenszel and sign tests were used to summarize the data. For central air-conditioning versus no air-conditioning, statistically significant benefits (p less than 0.05, Mantel-Haenszel test) were observed for the overall total, for females, for persons not in the labor force, and for persons living in fewer than six rooms. These groups had more exposure to air-conditioning. The relative risk for the total group was 0.58, implying that in hot weather, the death rate for persons who had central air-conditioning was 42 percent lower than the rate for persons who did not have air-conditioning, after confounding variables had been controlled for. For room air-conditioning versus no air-conditioning, the odds ratio for the total group was 0.96, which was not significantly different from 1.0, suggesting that no real benefit was derived from room air-conditioning. Some reasons for the lack of a demonstrable benefit for room air-conditioning are given.

    • Brown Nosers comes to mind. Oh please tells us, how far we have to shove our noses to get our grants. A new meaning to the term Gravy Train.

    • But the POTUS affirmed it himself! Just like we were affirmed that the NSA wasn’t breaking the 4th amendment.

  2. OMG, since there has been no global warming for the past 18 years, it is not climate change the patients are suffering from but rather, symptoms created by neurosis brought on by climate alarmists.

  3. The draft “Climate and Health Assessment” is open for public comment at the link given above.

    • In reality, no it isn’t. There is a webpage where gullible members of the public are invited to waste their time and expend energy uselessly, but not a single one of those comments will ever be read or considered by those running the show.
      Now at the end, they will probably put out a list of “representative comments” that of course will all support their stated positions. I would be willing to bet you a good deal of money that this “list of representative comments” was already written long before the website was made “open” to the public.
      One rule holds true for our government today – no matter how corrupt you may think our government is, in reality it is far more corrupt than you can possibly know.
      Everyone in this government knows that these “comments” are a fraud and a sham, and they laugh about it openly.

    • 100% code a data transparency is a requisite before you blindly believe your “vote” actually counts..

    • Well, I wasted 20 minutes trying to create an account so I could provide the public input that they say they want. (In addition they state that the draft assessment is not to be quoted or cited … how the hell can anyone provide any constructive input without citing or quoting the work?)
      I couldn’t get in … couldn’t comment. Did anyone else gain access?
      The attempted tie in to increasing extreme weather events is the biggest BS portion of the “Assessment”.
      As stated above the “draft assessment” states that it is not be cited or quoted. Regardless, the executive summary states:
      Climate change has already resulted in a shift in the frequency, intensity, and duration of certain
      extreme events (see Figure ES7).
      Figure ES&7 does not have anything to do with the stated premise (although there is a citation of some other work that says some extremes will be impacted by climate change … can’t argue with this since some extremes will go up and some will go down … significance of change is not specifically discussed).
      I skimmed the “assessment”. The Executive Summary, Chapter 7 (Extreme Weather), & Chapter (Mental Health and Well Being) are complete garbage … basically propaganda. The only reasonable assumption is that for some people the fear of extreme weather (because of all of the hype) may lead them to have further health problems.

  4. My low opinion of the medical fraternity is often questioned, especially in reference to the UK’s ‘glorious’ NHS but as J P O’Rouke said ““You really do love your NHS. But what I don’t understand is if it’s so good why are you always trying to fix it?”.

    • suissebob
      Thanks.
      We try to fix it because it is not efficient.
      It is, however, a totemic institution – vide the 2012 Olympic Opening Ceremony.
      Much of the actual medical care is pretty good, but some of the bits around that are, sadly, CARP.
      Mods – if not of relevance, please delete [and email suissebob, please]
      Let me bore you. I had a stent inserted in January. On the NHS.
      My ‘pre-op’ was before Xmas: here is the email I sent to the consultant [with certain identifiers removed, I am afraid …(very British)]: –
      ===========
      Doctor B,
      Thank you – and thanks to your team – for your efforts today; the practical medical side was excellent for me, and you and your team are an asset to the Hospital.
      Very much appreciated!
      As I indicated at the time, some other areas could repay constructive attention, and I very much appreciate your openness in asking for input from this patient, at least.
      I am sure you do this with all your patients – and that should allow continuous improvement!
      I would be certain of that, if the Hospital employs the Plan/Do/Check/Act methodology behind all the ISO management system standards.
      To specifics.
      The telephone system at the Hospital – especially the appointments/admissions line, on NNNN or NNNN – is utterly inadequate.
      I phoned to confirm the appointment change, to today; after four attempts – immediately after returning from my appointment on 19th November ’14 – lasting perhaps twenty-five minutes, and being told the memories/message boxes are full – I gave up and simply turned up today as required [although my letter was dated 17.11.2014, the team member I saw on 19.11.2014 did not have it on my file].
      Can’t some of this be emailed . . . . . . . . . .
      Incidentally – hard copy files in2014?
      Shipping, a profession at least as conservative as medicine, I guess, has been mostly paper-free, for me (now in my seventh decade), since about the turn of the century.
      My City Heart Centre was not in the index for the map at the main reception. I know maps like that are expensive, but, as a document control issue , it seems a problem.
      The invitation letter – the most recent in my file should be dated 17 November 2014, with reference M000636831 – is concise and clear.
      I would suggest that you add, similarly concise and clear, wording to cover the following: –
      •clear information about friends and relatives being kindly asked to leave after seeing patients to the unit. Much upset today on this. As everyday??
      •add a query about Blood group [if this relevant]
      •adding something about hydration – ‘take an extra glass of water the night before and another before 0600 on the day of admission’, say, but your words; you want blood vessels to be easy to find.
      •explain the questionnaire on admission – the information is required for medical purposes; it will be checked periodically whilst admitted [especially allergies, diabetes, previous history & c.]; and can be completed on-line before admission [maybe – if your IT’s Name Surname, who I worked with some years ago, can/is allowed to do it] – or at least download at this link, complete and bring in [that will save you, the Hospital, printing costs].
      •If the letter is a change of appointment, please make that clear. To save further, if it is indeed a change of appointment, do not send (again) the important leaflet ‘your angiogram/angioplasty’ – merely ask the patient to keep the one in the first letter (or request one at the pre assessment clinic).
      1.Incidentally, does each Trust draft their own leaflet for phlebotomy, angioplasty, adenoid removal, cataracts, ingrowing toenails and the rest? Cannot items like this be sourced centrally; routinely updated with best practice,; referenced with a link in the invitation letter, and the patient asked to confirm, perhaps in the questionnaire, that they have read the online leaflet. If they have questions, they should be noted and covered at the pre assessment clinic.
      2.This would apply, too, to admission/invitation letters, and – you know far better than I – perhaps other routine, standardisable documents issued in their millions, nationwide, each week . . .
      3.If adding much of this, do print letters, & c., double-sided.
      I am entirely happy that the Hospital agrees with its staff their hours of work. But if client-facing staff have a start-time after 0800, it may be worth considering whether asking patients to arrive at 0800 [and today, all five who attended were there by 0755] should be reviewed. Perhaps, as you suggested, 0815 for patients (given the traffic, it won’t make much difference to us/them].
      *** That the electronically-controlled doors were released at about 0750 is nice – but is, also, a security breach.
      I would treat it as such on my ships.
      Does the Hospital have a ‘flagging’ or ‘Near Miss’ or ‘Hazardous Event’ or ‘Opportunity for Improvement’ system?
      If so, perhaps you could raise this event as a ‘Near Miss’, or even a ‘Security Incident’?
      On arrival, can the Hospital not handle patients arriving at staggered times? [2 @ 0815, 2 @ 0900, and 2 @ 0945, say?]; some patients were ready for procedures by 0930, yet spent 90 to 120 minutes waiting.
      I emphasise the need to explain the need to double check some items on the questionnaire. To pick up the questionnaire, then ask several questions, risks looking unprofessional – without being very clear that these are, actually, important queries – and confirmations – that affect the patient’s treatment, and must be confirmed as best practice, even if most or all of the answers are in the document being held in the questioner’s hand.
      To then immediately take a BP reading compounds the perceived difficulty (even insensitivity)!
      Do your staff think that one amlodipine tablet and a ramipril capsule will miraculously reduce ‘BP’ by 30% in a couple of hours?
      Compared with, say, explaining what is happening . . . . .
      Do listen to the answers given by patients; one gentleman had been given a pencil to complete the questionnaire [‘no pen’ – my guess, “the cuts”!?!], explained that there had been no pen [no request to carry a pen is in the appointment letter] – but was made to listen to a repeated instruction for it to be inked, not pencilled, in.
      After the procedure, whilst waiting for – well, I knew only after about 90 minutes waiting, no earlier: why was there no simple explanation? If my delayed update was because I had asked questions earlier, I understand.
      The bolshie bu88er must learn his place.
      Not ideal as a model of client care, but very human.
      If, however, it is systemic, I suggest that you and your team collectively, need to investigate . . . .
      Remember patients, generally, have very little experience of the processes of a hospital.
      [and possibly ask staff to explain TLAs, etc.]
      My wife completed a ‘complaints form’ (Complaints, comments & congratulations form) – a glossy brochure. Could that not be a simple (cheap) black & white form, possibly on line . . . .
      I’m sure you have noted, too, that most of the above items are provider comfort, not patient information/understanding/convenience.
      That is cultural; necessary culture change (I know!) takes years to work through even a modest shipping company.
      The NHS, I hazard, may take a decade.
      Yes – how do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.
      Old QA maxim from the 1990s (at least).
      Finally (yes, you made it! – and thanks!):
      Do get fire door FD 89c/0/19/32 looked at. It closes, but noisily, and very slowly [twenty to thirty seconds – is that fast enough??].
      Doctor B, I would appreciate an acknowledgement, only, to both email addresses.
      Unless your system requires it [not optional, but actually required in black and white (and if it does – require – this, do, please seek to change it!) it is utterly unnecessary for individuals; MPs, government bodies, possibly . . . but NOT, absolutely not, individuals], there is absolutely no need on my side for you to respond in detail, let alone update me monthly on progress!
      You, your team, the Hospital and the NHS have many much more important tasks to handle.
      Thank you for your openness and patience with this email; I have tried to be constructive throughout, but I am human. If you need to redact some phrases before passing on within the Hospital please do so.
      And again, thanks for today.
      Best regards,
      =========
      Sorry – you asked . . . .
      Auto

      • @ Auto, that is one scary description of your British(?) medical; system. I have had 6 surgeries in the past 8 years. The last one a major spinal.
        All the pertinent info from the previous surgeries were ticked off within minutes during check in for that last one. The pre-op procedures were very clear and precise and understandable and were provided to me 2 DAYS! before that one.
        I had to be there 45 minutes prior which left us with lots of time to ask questions and make sure we understood everything again ( of course the major decisions prior to that last surgery took weeks but I am talking about the few hrs before the surgery, surgery was very early in the AM, 5 AM, 8 hrs long procedure)
        So when I walked into the pre-op area everything was a smooth ” please Mr X go here, please do your shower, you know what to do etc. and all the other small bits and pieces, And thankfully the surgery was a success.
        But there are times that even the best run hospital gets into a problem, what would happen if just as you are going in to your surgery a major accident happens. I have asked about that and the “Triage” mode takes over, so no more 7.15 or 7.45 starts, you might even have to wait till tomorrow. I believe the docs and the nurses in EM are extremely well trained and are trying to “sift” out every case, I over the years with 3 kids and parents have had to use the EM a number of times but in hindsight after evaluating the way these people work ??? there is no such thing as a “clock” they do what needs to be done and they are terrific!
        If my reply is in any way wrong I apologize and I would love a reply!
        To me, I just think there are times we just bitch too much.

  5. Ah, so now we know why old people move to FL. They’re really committing suicide.

  6. What a hulking load of unmitigated crap. This is a banal insult to those who are genuinely sick. And it’s obscene and disgusting to capitalize on the misfortunes of a few and then attempt to extend it for the furtherance of an anti-freedom agenda. Tar. Feathers. Pitchforks. Battering rams.

  7. Feed enough scare stories to people and surprise, surprise – their mental health suffers followed by the psychosomatic.
    Pointman

  8. This reminds me of a study done in Stockholm, i think, where they found that increasing temperature lead to increased deaths – but when you looked at the data, they were trying to say that people were dying because the average summertime high temperature had gone from 64 degrees Fahrenheit to 67 degrees Fahrenheit, or something like that.

  9. Lysenko would be so proud of the Whitehouse and the corruption of yet another professional society.

  10. “the nation’s leading medical practitioners … are stepping forward”
    I read the Grist article twice and found no clear identification of just who these “leading medical practitioners” are. A strange version of “stepping forward”.
    So I guess it is the two twits who wrote the article puffing themselves up.

  11. I think the real medical risks from climate change come from neuroses and phobic behaviors caused by fear, and cultic bonding/dependency issues.

  12. According to the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research the contiguous United States as warmed 0.6 F since the 1930’s. It’s hard to believe this is causing a health problem. I’ve seen the temperature change 20 degrees in a few minutes and I didn’t get sick.

    • It’s the long-time exposure. The healthiest people live in Greenland, I guess, and sickest in Australia.

      • The healthiest in greenland are those left that did not die from the cold conditions. The sickest in Australia are due to the benign climate allowing even the sick to continue to live.

    • If climate change is affecting Obama’s daughter’s asthma, I imagine it’ll take at least decades, if ever, for her to recover from each of the tax-payer funded Hawaiian vacations. Just think of the trauma – leaving DC for a polluted airport, stagnant pathogen-filled airline air, and then the incredible insult of warm, humid Hawaiian weather. I’m amazed she survived a round trip. If her dad had any empathy, he would have but her in a plastic bubble and locked her in a WH bathroom with a SS guard – a vacation she could enjoy, versus forcing her to endure days of climate-change torture.

  13. If memory serves, back in the UK povince of the PDREU/EUSSR they tried that one with the British Medical Association, suggesting they should advise patience of the hidden dangers for health due to global warming. This would come from a group of professionals who asserted the guvments daily alcohol consumption of no more than 3 units for men & 2 units for women. They still stick to it after after few years ago one of their members admitted that the figures were based upon no scientific/medical data/evidence, whatsoever, but were simply plucked out of thin air, obviously by people who “think” they know what’s good for us!

  14. This appears to be the result of a change in strategy by the administrations that I read about recently. They were disappointed in recent polling that showed climate change as a minor issue to the public. They determined it was likely because most people felt this way because they could not personally see the “dangers” of world wide global warming. The administration felt that if you could convince them that their health was in danger from global warming that this approach might be more effective way to use your propaganda.

  15. I talk to my plants and they told me to tell you guys they disagree with the premise that ‘climate change is a health threat.’
    By the way, here is their favorite album.
    We Plants Are Happy Plants

      • Thanks. I added them to my playlist and will check them out for sure. I’m always on the lookout for good music that I would otherwise have missed.
        Check out this beauty! I’m suiting up to go surfing as soon as I press ENTER, and this is what’s cranked at the moment to get me (more) fired up.
        The Suburbs
        Mr. Little Jeans

  16. Since the terrible high carbohydrate/high polyunsaturated fats and low saturated fats/low cholesterol has been increasing heart disease and obesity for over 50 years, how can they link this to global warming (“climate change”, call it what you will, it’s still a scam)? Impossible claims for the very simple fact that (1) we are not warming and (2) we are not that sensitive to the climate, as it changes so much during a day, week, or month.

  17. I have just really hurt my ribs… While falling off my chair laughing. Could someone furnish me with the telephone number of my nearest climate scientist so I can get my ribs looked at. I hear they are the ones to seek in a situation like this

    • I think you’re on to something Darren. Damaged ribs caused by…..climate change. Perhaps a grant to study who is more at risk to damaged ribs brought on by…..something related to climate change. Catastrophic to be sure.

  18. Just when you think the climate idiocy can’t possibly get any more idiotic, it does.

  19. OR….
    Peoples declining health may be linked to the advice giving to eat grains and avoid fat and meat?
    In not sure which is more corrupt science… nutrition or climate.

  20. Slightly off topic, but does anyone have Popper’s Rules of theory. I have lost them.

  21. The deception is actually worse than making something up. Air pollution in general and particulate pollution in particular (pun intended) have fallen dramatically over the past 50 years, yielding a significant improvement in public health.

    • But if you read the report you will find that the increase in temperature is not good. The growing season starts earlier and last longer, higher CO2 increases plant growth so more and longer lasting pollen pollution resulting in more asthma!

  22. This report is 405 pages. Will take a while to read.
    Written in IPCC style, but for the effect of global warming specifically for the USA.
    Again, nothing new, CO2 will drive the increase in temperature.
    Certainly in preparation for the next December USA delegation.
    Just a quick look at it to find that “Rising carbon dioxide can directly influence the nutritional content of foods”. All examples given are obviously negative! Protein content of such and such will decrease from 19 % to 17% etc.

  23. Obama went to the doctor the other day. The doc said, “You look like you’re feeling a little under the weather.”
    As recent developments have indicated the foregoing is but one more reason one has to be careful what they say to Obama because simpletons take things way too literally.

  24. Many of the most wide-spread and pernicious diseases we live with (thanks to a life expectancy extended by several decades in the last century alone!) still have unknown causes.
    Diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, strokes, arthritis, hypertension, allergies and many forms of cancer are readily diagnosed but cannot be cured or prevented because modern medicine cannot yet be sure of the causes.
    Throwing ‘climate change’ into the pot as just another confounding factor to distract the research and divert resources and attentions of the dedicated investigators does nobody any good.
    It amounts to quack medicine.

    • A lack of vitamin D causes all of those. Autism and autoimmune disease (probably all of them) as well.

  25. “We’re seeing more respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular disease, and heat-related deaths.”
    Have they accounted for aging baby boomers, an increasing population, and increased migration? Do they even have any statistics to back up these claims, or is it all anecdotal? I would like to see the number of heat-related deaths compared to the number of cold-related deaths. I would bet that cold-related deaths have increased more. (But they would probably blame climate change for those deaths, too.)

  26. “Oct 9, 2014 – Life expectancy in the USA rose in 2012 to 78.8 years – a record high.” — USA Today
    If climate change is causing more health problems and more deaths in the USA, wouldn’t life expectancy be going down instead of hitting a record high? Life expectancy actually correlates better with increasing CO2 than temperatures do. So how in the world can they claim that CO2 is a health threat? It’s more likely that the increase in CO2 helps improve life expectancy. It certainly hasn’t hurt it.

  27. The tropical paradise that is Hawaii, Alaska s arctic cold, the deserts of Arizona. I won’t go on.
    The USA has many climates so I’m assuming the “The nation’s public health leaders, doctors, and nurses” will find the perfect state with the perfect climate. (before it changes of course)

  28. It’s true. Look at all those old people who retire to Florida after living in northern states such as Connecticut, New Jersey and New York all their lives. Once they move to Florida, they are dying from heart disease, strokes, cancer, pulmonary disease and a host of other diseases. So it must be the change to a warmer climate that is causing these deaths.

  29. Per their website:
    The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) was established by Presidential Initiative in 1989 and mandated by Congress in the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990 to “assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change.”
    Their budget is 2.5 billion … about half coming from NASA and another 300 million from the Dept of Commerce.
    Imagine the quality of work we could get from them if we doubled their budget.
    Imagine the quality of work we could get from them if the budget was cut by 90%.
    Which should happen?

  30. climate change is wreaking havoc here in FL. obama said so.
    Perhaps it’s the people living on the coast who are trying to escape their flooded condos due to rising oceans and are trapped in tent cities filled with the other sick climate refugees and giant spiders.
    Other than that, I’m still trying to visualize the “havoc”
    noun
    1.
    destruction; devastation; ruin
    2.
    (informal) confusion; chaos
    3.
    (archaic) cry havoc, to give the signal for pillage and destruction
    4.
    (often foll by with) play havoc, to cause a great deal of damage, distress, or confusion (to)
    definitions 3 and 4 could be at play here.
    has the bam given the signal?
    Has the bam caused a great deal of damage, distress, or confusion….most definitely.

  31. ‘Results show that across audience segments, the public health focus was the most likely to elicit emotional reactions consistent with support for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Findings also indicated that the national security frame may possibly boomerang among audience segments already doubtful or dismissive of the issue, eliciting unintended feelings of anger.’ From A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change: A Letter in Climatic Change, January 2012.
    http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Myers et al_A public health frame.pdf
    Looks like the Consensus took the advice of Myers et al. Another part of the seemingly endless effort to achieve yet more emotional engagement, and just the right sort of emotions too, in order that the pressure of persuasion is ratcheted up still further. After decades of such emotional targeting, of course this has worked extremely well upon most scientists and politicians and policy makers, which explains their huge emotional bias.

  32. “86. With all of this evidence pointing to physical, mental and long-term disorders even long
    into the future (including cancers and mutant newborns), is this honestly worth the risk to our
    next generations for the sake of just a few metres of wire and a plug. As shown, the dangers of
    low-level, below-thermal microwaves, have been known to governments for >50 years. I was
    educated in microwave technology by the Military (United Kingdom) in the early 1960’s, and
    even then we were instructed of these dangers. Nothing has changed to suddenly make
    microwaves safe.”
    http://www.wirelesswatchblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2001/11/20-Amended-Declaration-of-Barry-Trower.pdf

  33. Obviously, then, the solution is to divert funds from medicine to Climate Change, because then those funds will be serving two purposes…health and Climate Change. Fight the problem at the root!
    My guess is, the “Leading Doctors” might just then change their minds…

  34. I’m throwing the BS flag on this. People have been moving to warmer climates to extend their lives for decades, siting the average lifespan in Miami is 8 years longer than the average lifespan in New York. And the average temperature in Miami is more than 20 degrees F higher than New York. If an overall rise in average temperature for this country of 1 degree F over 70 years is causing health problems, then the health problems with people moving to warmer climates must be 10 times worse. The climate change you experience when you move from New York to Miami is an instantaneous change in average temperature that is 10 times greater than what anyone has experienced in their life from climate change if they have stayed in one place. So if climate change causes health problems then the government should be warning us about the health problems associated with moving and changing climates rather than the climate change experienced when staying in one location.

  35. PsyOps.

    Millions of people are likely to exhibit some of the following symptoms in response to climate change’s stressors:
    • Anxiety
    • Post-traumatic stress
    • Depression
    • Interpersonal conflict and societal conflict
    • Family stress
    • Persistent grief
    • Child behavioral and developmental problems and academic decline
    • Eco-anxiety, hopelessness, and avoidance from the awareness of climate change
    Climate change’s devastation, from severe storms and droughts to heat waves and more-polluted air, has been shown to increase citizens’ rates of anxiety, depression, and traumatization. These symptoms can persist for years after experiencing the loss of homes, livelihoods, and community resources — such as schools, grocery stores, shops, hospitals, and farms — that help us to manage our daily lives. Hurricane Katrina is but a microcosm of what may happen across the nation and world in the coming years as climate change unfolds.
     — http://www.psysr.org/about/programs/climate/mentalhealth.php

    The anticipation is killing me.

  36. So now “Flu Season” wouldn’t exist if not for fossil fuel? Do we now, in addition to CAGW, do we have CAFS? (Catastrophic Anthropomorphic Flu Season)
    Add that to the list of the (bad) things the wonder molecule, CO2, causes.
    Here’s another thing it causes.
    http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/12/24/uncontacted-tribe-attacks-amazon-village/
    You guessed it!
    The story throws in “Climate Change” as a cause of this all-to-human, if primitive, expression of greed.
    (I do wonder just why the “H” these people aren’t “contacted”? To preserve their primitivity? So they can be our tutors once the globe follows the CAGW promoters’ “sustainable energy” plans?
    SHEESH! Go in with inoculations against diseases they haven’t been exposed to then bring them into the modern world. Who here would want one of their kids to live like they do?)

  37. Medicine, in case you hadn’t noticed, is the other vast sink for junk science, unproven dogma “everyone knows” is “true” and an endless gravy train for those who can successfully hoodwink their dupes into believing they “need” whatever the Scare of the Week prescribes.
    At least 60% of modern medical practice has no scientific basis but a “belief system.” Which is an excellent reason to avoid it as much as possible, and understand its limitations when forced to use it. Read the books by Dr. Gilbert Welch for an airing-out of a very dirty business.

    • Hmmm….makes one wonder why tort reform wasn’t a part of Obamacare.
      They didn’t want to cut down on those entertaining law firm commercials?
      “If you or a loved one were diagnosed with (fill in the blank) and were prescribed (fill in the blank) and suffered (fill in the blank) or death, call the law firm of (fill in the blank). You may be entitled to a cash award!
      The “ambulance chasers” have gone Green. They don’t burn gas, they advertise.

  38. nothing is safe from the CAGW-funded academics:
    5 May: The Conversation: Extreme heat poses a billion-dollar threat to Australia’s economy
    by Kerstin Zander, Senior Research Fellow at Charles Darwin University,
    Elspeth Oppermann, Post-doctoral researcher, the Northern Institute at Charles Darwin University &
    Stephen Garnett, Professor of Conservation and Sustainable Livelihoods at Charles Darwin University
    Disclosure Statement
    Elspeth Oppermann has received funding from the NT department of health for research on heat stress, but not for the current study.
    Stephen Garnett has received funding from the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility and the Australian Research Council
    Kerstin Zander does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
    In a paper published today in Nature Climate Change, we and colleagues show that heat stress probably cost the Australian economy nearly A$7 billion in 2013-2014 through productivity losses such as those we’ve mentioned above…
    That bodes ill for the future, with heatwaves forecast to get hotter and more common thanks to climate change…
    Regardless of the reason, productivity loss from heat was a major cost to the Australian economy in 2014. Of 1,726 respondents sampled randomly from the Australian population, 7% did not go to work on at least one day in the previous 12 months because of heat stress…
    Ten times that number (70%) went to work but thought they were less efficient…
    This figure is conservative. It does not include productivity loss among those younger than 18 or older than 65, nor does not include the effects of heat on voluntary work or home duties…
    http://theconversation.com/extreme-heat-poses-a-billion-dollar-threat-to-australias-economy-41153
    4 May: New Scientist: Michael Slezak: Severe heat costs the Australian economy US$6.2 billion a year
    Journal reference: Nature Climate Change, DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE2623
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27458-severe-heat-costs-the-australian-economy-us62-billion-a-year.html?cmpid=RSS%7CNSNS%7C2012-GLOBAL%7Conline-news

  39. Following the Bama logic, electric bills “necessarily skyrocketing” will cause
    many additional deaths due to unaffordable air conditioning for many senior
    citizens.
    Carbon tax will be the real killer.

  40. The cleverly devised marketing term: ‘Carbon’ is another misleading word to capture the ill-informed masses. It can easily be interpreted as particulates, smog, dust, and fumes. This provides an opportunity to carefully steer away from CO2 and propagandize pollution in general with all the respiratory illnesses associated with particulates. And why are heat-related deaths increasing when the planet hasn’t warmed in 18 years?

  41. If the article linked to was written by a random blogger living in his mothers basement that would one thing.
    However the article was written by a professor and a Dean (Jonathan Patz, professor and director of the Global Health Institute at the University of Wisconsin in Madison and Howard Frumkin, dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Washington).
    Forget the imagined danger to human health, the real danger is sending our young adults to institutions run by imbeciles. What I mean by imbeciles are those who believe ignorance, lack of evidence and lack of critical thinking are virtues when supporting an ideology.
    Universities should be required to come with a disclaimer; “The stupids are in charge – Use at own risk”

  42. Americans are very mobile people. We move quite a lot. If someone moves and finds themselves exposed to a new climate and/or a new set of viruses to contend with, then how does that person, or a health care professional, separate this confounding factor? How does one factor aging into the question? This is nonsense.

Comments are closed.