Study: Global Warming won't reduce winter deaths

_79366701_winter_deaths_624_v3[1]Note: the graph above is not part of the IOP press release, but provided for comparison.

From the Institute of Physics:

In a study that contradicts the received wisdom on health impacts of climate change, scientists say that we shouldn’t expect substantial reduction in winter deaths as a result of global warming. This new research is published today (Friday 19 June) in IOP Publishing’s Environmental Research Letters journal.

The research team was led by Professor Patrick Kinney of Columbia University in the USA.

Professor Kinney said “As Dr Margaret Chan told delegates at the recent World Health Assembly, we need to know the potential impacts of climate change on health so that we can plan public health interventions, accordingly.

“For years I’ve been hearing people say that global warming will reduce winter deaths but I wanted to check this claim out for myself.” Professor Kinney and his colleagues used statistical methods to pick apart the possible factors contributing to deaths of older people during the winter; they found that cities with warmer winters have similar amounts of winter deaths as do cities with colder winters.

“Most older people who die over the winter don’t die from cold,” Professor Kinney said, “they die from complications related to flu and other respiratory diseases. “Unfortunately the holiday season probably plays a part; when older people mix with the younger generations of their families, they come into contact with all the bugs that the kids have brought home from school.”

We often hear about “flu season” but it actually isn’t known why flu emerges in seasonal waves. There is some evidence that dry air in winter plays a role, but having had personal experience of lung irritation resulting from a room humidifier, Professor Kinney has second thoughts about that particular solution. “Vaccination and good hygiene are probably the most affective interventions available, right now,” he said.

The research doesn’t say that cold can’t be deadly – of course it can – but deaths due to slips and falls, heart attacks while shovelling snow, hypothermia, etc. are anomalies amongst the relatively high number of deaths from communicable diseases.

The people in the study all lived in the USA or France and the majority had access to a warm indoor environment. “Because of this” says Professor Kinney, “most people aren’t directly exposed to cold air for long periods.”

Of course, there are many factors that may link climate change to health and wellbeing. We see mosquito-borne diseases emerging in new territories because warmer winter temperatures enable the insects to over-winter in more northerly regions; warmer temperatures can also enable an insect-borne virus to replicate inside the insect vector to be transmitted and cause disease in a human or animal; cases of food poisoning tend to increase with warmer summer temperatures; and airborne pollution and pollen worsen as temperatures rise, causing deaths from respiratory failure.

Sadly, this research tells us that an increase in summer deaths due to climate change is unlikely to be counteracted by a reduction in winter deaths.

###

From 19 June 2015, this paper can be downloaded from http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/10/6/064016/article

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
50 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 19, 2015 9:18 am

Is this a scientific claim? The author seems to be “guessing” that warmer winters won’t reduce deaths. Does he have any factual empirical data to back this up? The graph included by the blogger seems to show a drop in excess winter deaths from around 1970 which happens to correspond with when temperatures were rising. If this is England’s data it implies the U.S. may be saving already 100-150,000 lives a year already from global warming. Let’s assume that half of that is from improved medical care. Then 50-75 thousand lives may be being saved In the U.S. From warmer weather.

June 19, 2015 9:34 am

The only control he applied is looking at rate of death in colder vs warmer winter cities. However people in colder climates may prepare better for the winter. Their health systems may be better prepared to handle cold illnesses. There may be many reasons. Also what temperature differences did he look at? Did he mix rural vs heavily populated cities? There are many ways to play with the data to make it look anyway you want.
He also seems remarkably unaware of flu propagation vectors and why they are more prevalent in winter. The flu virus is extremely temperature dependent creature. It dies very rapidly when exposed to warmer temperatures. This is why it doesn’t spread nearly as easily in summer.

Ed
Reply to  logiclogiclogic
June 19, 2015 12:14 pm

That they went out of their way to use an inappropriate comparison says all that need be said about this “study” and the warming alarmists who want to believe.

SandyInLimousin
June 19, 2015 11:37 pm

England has a long history of Malarial infections, with many references to Ague generally beleived to be malaria. Just one of many studies quoted below:

From historical records, we know that a malarious illness referred to as “the ague” or “intermittent fever” caused high levels of mortality in the British marshlands and fens from the 15th to the 19th century (4, 5). Robust evidence that the illness was malaria emerged in the early 19th century, when the increasing use of quinine and advances in fever diagnosis and pathology created a distinct separation from other acute fevers. Definitions of ague in 19th-century medical textbooks uniquely indicate malaria as they invariably refer to noncontagious transmission, distinctive cold, hot, and sweating stages, tertian onset of symptoms, cycling relapses, anemia, splenomegaly or “ague cake,” and susceptibility to quinine (6, 7). The remarkable virulence of this disease in England, given that the pathogen responsible was presumably Plasmodium vivax, has never been explained satisfactorily (5). The situation in Britain was not unique. In Holland at the end of the 19th century, equally high death rates were reported from intermittent fevers, believed to be caused by P. vivax (8). Although currently responsible for 80 million annual cases of malaria worldwide, P. vivax is not now a lethal parasite (9). One possible explanation for the high malaria mortality rates observed in 19th-century Europe is the high likelihood of coinfections with pathogens associated with poor sanitation.

http://www.pnas.org/content/100/17/9997.full

John Meget
June 23, 2015 8:48 pm

Did the study consider the extra crops/food a warmer (and assumedly higher CO2) world will grow, likely leading to less deaths by starvation?