Or: Surging levels of greenhouses gases are making people tired and stupid, scientists claim
- Higher CO2 in poorly ventilated places can make workers feel tired and slow
- Entire population could experience tiredness caused by burning of fossil fuels
- Huge surge in levels of CO2 in the air could affect memory and concentration
Surging levels of greenhouse gases could make people tired, forgetful and stupid, scientists claim.
Afternoon fatigue, the slump that office workers often experience, could become a worldwide problem due to surging levels in carbon dioxide.
A factor in sick building syndrome is higher carbon dioxide levels in poorly ventilated workplaces which can make workers feel lethargic, low in energy and slow, The Sunday Times reported.
But increased levels of carbon dioxide could not just affect office workers but the entire population by the end of the century, according to scientists at University College London.
A factor in sick building syndrome is higher carbon dioxide levels in poorly ventilated workplaces which can make workers feel lethargic, low in energy and slow. Stock image
It is the first research by scientists to warn about the toxic effect that raised greenhouses gases can have on humans.
The raised levels of carbon dioxide would be driven by the burning of fossil fuels.
Burning oil, coal, and natural gas are the leading causes of the carbon dioxide emissions driving climate change.
‘Human cognitive performance declines with an increase in CO2’, the researchers wrote in the paper.
‘Direct impacts of CO2 emissions on human cognitive performance may be unavoidable’.
HT/Willis E
I’ve wondered why there are so many stupid people around. I thought it was the school system.
You are on to something there Karabar and CAGWarmistism has a lot to do with it in that CO2 phobia is at epidemic proportions.
Indirectly it is, Sophie is a graduate of ‘journalism’ school, and she’s clearly intent on making people dumber than prior to reading her insights, so there’s an indirect link there, and if we dug a bit deeper we could probably convert that to a direct link to the school she came through.
Could someone help me with the logic here? I breathe in 0.04% CO2 and I breath out 4% CO2, so I’m already exposed to a CO2 concentration 100 times that of the atmosphere. The CO2 concentration in the air of a nuclear sub ranges from 3.5% to as high as 10.6%. How do these sailors know which way is up? Even if you double ambient CO2 levels to 0.08% what possible effect could that have?
Trebla;
I think you have added a “0” to the magnitudes in submarines. A quick search yields 3,500 – 10,000 ppm, which would be 0.35% to 1%. 10% would be 100,000 ppm and is a level considered “immediately dangerous to life and health” by the Center for Disease Control.
As long as the O2 percentage is high enough – does it matter what the other gasses are? I have been in labs where CO2 and N2 are used for cooling tests. They have to have an O2 monitor installed. Of the O2 goes too low an alarm goes off so everyone doesnt faint and die.
“does it matter what the other gasses are?”
Yes.
By the way, the alarm for low O2 is needed because our breathing reflex is keyed to the amount of CO2 in our lungs, not the amount of O2. If e. g. N2 increases and replaces O2 we just “fall asleep”, for good.
On the other hand if CO2 goes too high we will definitely notice it, even if there is enough O2 around.
It is the school system.
yep
I’m guessing a healthy autocorrelation with liberalism might be in play. Yes, on the submarine we had a somewhat larger concentration of CO2, but I don’t think there any extra stupidity was exhibited. It’s not the best environment for it.
Well it is absolutely clear that it is making the climate scientists more stupid
Yeah right – how about lack of oxygen?
My first thought as well Karabar. We can restate that headline to read: “Surging levels of propaganda are making people tired and stupid. Public Schools attendance thought to be the leading cause.”
I wonder if private schools are perhaps more liberal leaning than public schools? This constant beating of the drum against public schools without a shred of fact gnaws on my nerves. Yuppies who homeschool and private schools that cater to the young family already born with a silver spoon may be just as gullible to poor research and overly stated conclusions, such as the one in this sub thread.
” This constant beating of the drum against public schools without a shred of fact”
Yikes!
Item 1:
Around 1990, I noticed a huge shift, and all at once. All of a sudden, the young clerks at the convenience stores could not make change for a purchase. They had to wait for the automatic cash register to calculate the amount of change to return to the customer.
I have to tell you, this was not one incident, it was widespread. The current generation has no clue about counting up change. They just do not know.
Item 2:
I noticed a co-worker struggling with filling out the repair tickets for the work we were doing. Literacy, obviously was the problem. So I quizzed the fellow.
Vowels, consonants? Nope.
Dipthongs, breaking a word into syllables? Never heard of it.
Ok, how did they teach you reading? “We were told to recognize words by their shape“.
Clearly, the next level up, nouns, verbs, adjectives, and the whole structure of the language is totally inaccessible to this fellow. A true functional illiterate, increasingly common today but unheard of 20 years prior.
Item 3:
The National Geographic Society sponsors the annual National Geographic Challenge, an academic competition for school kids.
Circa mid 1990s, they give up after a majority of high schoolers could not identify Canada and Mexico as the neighbors of the US. to the North and South.
Item 4:
I have been informed that the recent crops of P.S. graduates can not make use of a standard round faced, analog clock. Without a digital clock, they literally can not tell the time.
The proof is all around you, walking around town, shopping in the malls.
They can not count change or tell time. They are functionally illiterate and profoundly innumerate. They can not find Europe on a globe.
But they can, and will, tell you how they feel about everything.
One must remember that the state sets the minimum requirement standards for both public and private systems. Most home schooler’s have to abide by state approved plans and testing. (At least we did. We had to obtain approval for our lesson plans and testing).
As home schoolers we choose to go beyond their standards and include cognitive thinking exercises and reasoning skills. I would hope that is what most would do. We did and many friends we have, that home school, also go the extra mile in the hopes we will not raise sheep. Its rather interesting that the state frowns on adding these to their curriculum. We fought tooth and nail to keep them in.
This is a problem, which starts at the top of our unelected school system bureaucrats. For some reason these people do not want people who question them or their policies. Most of our school boards follow UN Sustainable Development Policies and we know these frown on people questioning the state on anything.
“Actually, you didn’t turn in a research paper. You turned in a random assemblage of sentences. In fact, the sentences you apparently kidnapped in the dead of night and forced into this violent and arbitrary plan of yours clearly seemed to be placed on the pages against their will. Reading your paper was like watching unfamiliar, uncomfortable people interacting at a cocktail party that no one wanted to attend in the first place. You didn’t submit a research paper. You submitted a hostage situation.”
Both of my children report near continuous proselytizing against conservative values – and thins in a town 65% Republican.
Imagine all these slow people around with right handed sharks .. it’s going to be a bloodbath.
Mind you if we could get them all to inhale the CO2 at one time (A bit like Mao’s big jump) we may yet stabilize the volcanoes for Mosher.
It doesn’t take much online research to figure out that ambient CO2 concentrations in breathing air have zero health effects at any credible atmospheric concentration.
Today atmospheric CO2 is at about 410 ppm … or 0.04% of air. Humans easily tolerate up to 2% concentration – or fifty times current atmospheric concentrations of CO2. Humans can survive up to about 20% concentration, or 500 times current atmospheric concentrations of CO2.
So even if the atmospheric CO2 concentration eventually reaches a doubling of current values at 820 ppm, it is still vastly below the level that could cause any effects on human performance, which is 20,500 ppm.
Just more hyperbolic scare mongering by so-called “scientists”.
My understanding is that submariners live in an environment of 900 PPM of CO2. If that is on a nuclear sub, then that is truly frightening! -:) I call this “paper” Horse pucky
900 ? Try 5000 , sometimes a lot higher .
More like up to 8000ppm/v. Things start to get difficult for humans at about 15000ppm/v, 1.5% as in Apollo 13. If you are worried about 900ppm/v don’t go in to a commercial greenhouse.
Or a brewery, or some hot springs, crowded movie theaters, elevators, courtrooms, operating rooms, airplanes, their cockpits, schools, exam rooms, gymnasiums, automobiles, buses, trains, some caves, basements, utility rooms, control rooms, chemical plants, power plants, and yes definitely submarines, space capsules and even mission control.
Yes indeed. And people worry about ~410ppm/v?! Crazy!
A+++!
RShearer
Quite so increased levels of CO2 can have quite counterintuitive effects, according to a report to the Subcommittee on Emergency and Continuous Exposure Guidance Levels for Selected Submarine Contaminants 3 Carbon Dioxide:
“A number of studies suggest that CO2 exposures in the range of 15,000-40,000 ppm do not impair neurobehavioral performance. Schaefer (1961) reported that 23 crewmen exposed to CO2 at 15,000 ppm for 42 days in a submarine showed no psychomotor testing effects but showed moderate increases in anxiety, apathy, uncooperativeness, desire to leave, and sexual desire …”:
https://www.nap.edu/read/11170/chapter/5
It appears that rock concerts get up to about 15,000 ppm and we breathe out 20,000 ppm. It’s not surprising that we can start higher than 20,000 ppm.
I note that the article contains zero mention of ppm levels using actual digits. It’s all scary hand waving all the way down.
“…42 days in a submarine…showed moderate increases in…desire to leave, and sexual desire…”
What a surprise, but I suspect it had little to do with CO2 levels.
Was those symptoms due to “15,000 ppm” or “42 days in a submarine” I wonder?
What do you reckon the level might have been in the office where that was written then?
Of course 43 days in a submarine, irrespective of the CO2 level, might be expected to have the effect mentioned last.
Chris Hanley December 15, 2018 at 6:49 pm
Of course 43 days in a submarine, irrespective of the CO2 level, might be expected to have the effect mentioned last.
The most disparaging comment I ever heard about a sales manager: “He could not sell pussy in a submarine”.
Whenever I see articles that state “Blah blah blah scientists say” my BS detector goes off the scale. This stated to happen for me after the 1980’s BSE scare in the UK where cattle were fed infected animal offal such as brains and nerves, processed in to a dried feed pellet. Govn’t scientists told us it was safe. Shorty after people started to present with CJD symptoms and there were deaths (I don’t recall how many).
I understand BSE is now showing up, again, in cattle in the EU zone.
Was it Reagan who said the 7 most worrying words are “Trust me. I am from the Govn’t.”?
Re BSE, and then medical scientists said that a hundred thousand or more Britons would die over the next couple decades having likely already been infected with BSE. That didn’t happen either.
DMacKenzie
Mooo?
“Scientists” ? Really? Scientists came to the conclusion that the ambient atmosphere outside is Soooooooo loaded with Co2 as to make people “stupid”. “Scientists” … really ? Please define “scientist” … esp. when used as an “authoritative” source of information.
Oh, yeah? What about 100,000 ppm? Huh!? What about that!? That’s what we had when I was young, and we loved it!
Was that after inhaling?
Clearly you took a breath sometime later which is a shame.
Stupid TROLL
Documented affects don’t start to occur until you are well north of 2000-3000ppm.
Yet these guys are worried about increasing CO2 levels from 280 to 500ppm.
People like this, a room full of leftist dopes listening to Bill McKibben. (The natural gas burning fireplace in the background is a nice ironic touch.)
The major factor in “sick building syndrome” is mass psychogenic illness, with the “illness” progressing according to sight lines, not air circulation.
Many LEED buildings have problems with sewer gas ingress.
Odd that EPA’s fact sheet on Sick Building Syndrome makes no mention of carbon dioxide. SBS has been around since the 1970s when buildings were tightened to reduce air infiltration and heat demand. Ventilation standards were reduced from 1 to 3 air changes per hour down to as low as 0.35. But the reduction in ventilation resulted in high indoor humidity and reduced removal of common indoor pollutants and odors. Excess humidity leads to water condensation within walls which results in mold growth and all sorts of health issues.
CO2 has never been considered a factor. It is, however, relatively easy to measure and can be used as an indicator of poor ventilation.
By the way, there are many unvented gas heating appliances which can be used in living spaces that add significant quantities of CO2 and H2O to the indoor environment. These have Oxygen Depletion safety sensors that shut them off when O2 reaches about 18%. At that point CO2 will be at about 3% or 30,000 ppm. I can attest to the fact that it is quite difficult to create the conditions necessary to test these sensors but the concern is primarily the potential to build up dangerous levels of carbon monoxide and nitrous oxide and not CO2. Some countries (e.g. Canada) and US states do not allow the sale of unvented heaters for consumer indoor use.
Another article rediscovering the bleedin’ obvious. Gas appliances capillary soldering of copper pipe don’t have vents or sensors. While monitoring confined spaces, I used to get laughed at for suggesting the operatives opened windows or vents if available, otherwise fetch a ventilation kit. Two guys talking, soldering and of course secretly smoking? The levels could be over 2000ppm before they even started. I would set the alarm to scream at 3000. “Aagh what the F&^% is that!!”
We sealed buildings up tight…to make them more efficient
…then install ventilation systems so we don’t die
Rick C PE – December 15, 2018 at 7:47 pm
NAH, you got some bad info from someone,
Amazon will sell you all the
Vent Free Natural Gas Heaters that you want to purchase.
The Truth About Vent Free Gas Heaters
http://www.infraredinfo.com/Article_2.html
I would tend to believe that Radon would be the cause of stupidity becauyit is the dominant air quality problem in most homes, at least in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast
Like they say about hard times not building character, but rather revealing it – CO2 has not made people stupid, it has only revealed the latent and inherent stupidity in a lot of people.
True, and we would be better off if many of them stopped breathing.
Gosh! The folks working in major greenhouse operations (1000 – 1500 ppmv CO2) must be near zombies! And the high CO2 levels are caused by global warming…. and the bottled CO2 gas they are releasing into the green houses to invigorate and accelerate plant growth.
J Mac
At least we now know why plants don’t talk.
https://www.quora.com/At-what-CO2-percentage-would-our-atmosphere-become-toxic-to-humans
I a total of 4 years under water from 1964 to 1970
“While on active submarine patrol for 57 days, 7 out of 15 crewmen exposed to CO2 at 8,000-12,000 ppm developed decreased plasma calcium and increased erythrocyte calcium (Messier et al. 1976). There were no changes in parathyroid hormone or calcitonin (Messier et al. 1976). Some observational data from submarine patrols documented increased urinary calculi in crewmen when CO2 was present at >10,000 ppm most of the time, instead of at <10,000 ppm (Tansey et al. 1979). There are several physiologic reasons why that is not thought to be causal; in particular, the incidence rate of urinary calculi observed in submariners does not seem to exceed the general population rate. Exposure to CO2 at 50,000 ppm for 30 min led to increased renal blood flow, glomerular filtration rate, and renal venous pressure, as well as increased renal vascular resistance (Yonezawa 1968). These physiologic changes related to renal compensation for CO2-induced acidosis are considered to be innocuous. Thus, electrolyte, bone, and kidney effects are not appropriate end
Now that’s what I call scientific discourse! Obviously far too difficult for a typical climate change journalist.
My cousin was a submariner here in the navy in Oz. He once mentioned that for some unknown reason submariners almost all have daughters not sons. Was this a consequence of higher CO2 levels ? Don’t know.
And an air force pilot mentioned the same phenomenon caused by proximity to the aircraft radar. I mentioned to him that a more plausible explanation was that Y-chromosome sperm swim better when a woman achieves orgasm – something to do with the ph of the cervix. Thus rather than radar the true cause was ineffective technique. He wasn’t amused.
Nah. My brother was an officer in a nuclear sub for years and had three sons, no daughters. He confirms that they routinely ran with 5000-8000 ppm CO2, and even above 10,000 at times.
No, it’s long absence from home. Nature interprets this as having insufficient females in the population and corrects it.
As usual, they have it entirely back to front. The people who are tired and/or stupid are under the belief and impression that ‘surging’ levels of CO2 are making changes to the climate or Global Warming.
and the fact most eat junk food for lunch then need a sugar hit for afternoon smoko and perk up till knockoff..
lot of tradies in Aus use coffeemilk for breakfast or on the way to work and its got massive sugar in it,
another at 11 and lunch and smoko
if its not that its the damnable coke a cola hits
nowdays is being immobile for hours staring at screens, no freshair or excersize between times.
and yes the stupid is from our pathetic ed systems as well.
The people who are stupid are looking for any excuse other than the truth. This seems very similar to the CAGW crowd.
From NAP.EDU:
Emergency and Continuous Exposure Guidance Levels for Selected Submarine Contaminants: Volume 1 (2007)
“CO2 exposure did not affect performance on the tracking task or any of
the six RPM subtests (Storm and Giannetta 1974). There was a learning effect for the tracking task during both pre-exposure and recovery, but the authors still thought it was appropriate to conclude the absence of a performance impairment. The authors considered it especially likely because previous pa- pers had suggested that impairment is easier to detect during skill reacquisi- tion, which occurred following the 2 weeks of exposure without practice, rather than at an asymptotic skill level (Storm and Giannetta 1974). Thus, CO2 at 40,000 ppm for 2 weeks did not affect performance on multiple tests of cognitive function in physically fit young airmen, a population probably not unlike submariners.
Based on the work of Storm and Giannetta (1974) and Glatte et al. (1967), a NOAEL of 30,000 ppm for general CNS effects could be proposed.”
CO2 is a toxic gas if over 20% of air, (200,000ppm)
Oxygen is a toxic gas if over 50% of air pvp (500,000ppm)
CO2 build up in the blood is the trigger for the breathing response, not lack of O2, and don’t forget that it’s the reduced O2 levels that causes a problem in humans and not increased CO2. Reduced blood CO2 levels reduces O2 uptake in blood/increased blood CO2 levels increase blood flow and increases oxygen uptake and relaxes muscles/brain. (think hyperventilation)
In our lungs the CO2 level is in the range of 2.7 to 7.5 % (but an average of 6 %)
Thats 27,000 to 75,000 parts per million (which is 67 to 187 times greater than in air ) !
so yes the lungs do admit air at 400ppm but as the air reaches the lungs it mixes with the residual volume (approx 20% of 6 Litres) of heavily CO2 loaded air, the lungs never get to see 400ppm but normally never less than 27000ppm (say 3%)
O2 volume of air is 20.8 % Lhaza, at 3,658m has a lower pressure which equates to around 14% pvp just for interest
So , we breath in air at 20.8% O2 and breath out at approx 16% O2 (that 5% is what gives us 100% O2 saturation in the blood, hence no more is absorbed, hence remainder is exhaled) Who gives fig about CO2 in air ?
Yeah, just another BS study that shows they’re jumping the shark.
R Shearer December 15, 2018 at 6:39 pm
Yeah, just another BS study that shows they’re jumping the shark.
Yes, but they are getting away with it.
Unfortunately, you’re mostly correct, but there’s a fighting chance, and when has there ever been a time when insanity doesn’t raise its ugly head?
At the Sydney Morning Herald here in Australia an article, of many usually daily, was published about how coal burning is killing the planet. One commenter stated that burning coal, and thus spewing in to the air millions of tonnes of CO2, was increasing shark attacks! Serial!
The issue is 99.9% of people watch MSM and believe the 97% of “climate scientists” (All 75 of them from the AGU survey) that CO2 at ~410ppm/v is “dangerous” and are completely ignorant of how their own bodies work.
There must be an international climate conference in the wind ? (/s in case)
Yes and as usual they agreed to agree, except for the parts yet to be agreed in a future meetings.
These non binding agreements that all but a handfull of countries failed at, even thought they set there own targets are encourage to make more ambitious targets because they didn’t fail their moderate targets by enough.
Developed countries are encouraged to make outrageous assistance package claims they have no intention of honouring to developing countries with imaginary climate damages and in the name of world human social justice.
The important part is we have made these fantastic agreements and all striking school children will be able to go back to class, safe in the knowledge we saved the planet.
Did I miss anything out?
It sounds better if it’s written as, “surging levels of greenhouses gases are making tired and stupid scientists.” It seems that there’s a lot of that going around of late.
I thought they were talking about the surging CO2 gasses emanating from the mouths of alarmists were making people stupider…?! They certainly make the believer-drones I encounter more stupid. Much more stupid in fact. Although they were pretty damn stupid to begin with. Ha ha…what a crock-o-shit. For Millennial consumption only.
What is next to blame because of global warming? The next thing will be increased divorce scare because of CO2 now that we “KNOW” that CO2 causes poor memory and poor concentration, leads to heart attacks, is carcinogenic, shortens the life of individual cells,…………………..etc. In fact HIGH levels of CO2 will cause men to lose interest in sex, women to abandon their kids, and other general mayhem. WE ARE ALL DOOMED BECAUSE OF A MOLECULE THAT IS ESSENTIAL TO LIFE ITSELF. /sarc
The world has gone absolutely stark raving mad.
“The world has gone absolutely stark raving mad.”
Not the whole world. There are still some sane people remaining. After all, Trump got elected. 🙂
Oh , and the piece claims we will be four or five times the present levels by 2100 .
Riiight ….1600 to 2000 ppm !
And pigs will fly ….
We couldn’t reach those levels of CO2 in the atmosphere if we burned all the fossil fuels available. I think about 800ppm-1000ppm is the best we could do if we burned it all.
At those levels, we will be harvesting two days before we plant the crop.
I know it is true because I readed it on ta interwebs.
And of course the photo to go with the claim
shows steam and water vapor, not CO2.
Sophie Law … ‘journalist’ …
You just made the planet dumber Sophie, and all it took was your writing.
You made an error she is a … fiction author
In my experience, the Daily Mail is not noted for the quality of its writing employees.
“Based on the requests for comments section [on the reliable sources noticeboard], volunteer editors on English Wikipedia have come to a consensus that the Daily Mail is ‘generally unreliable and its use as a reference is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist’.
“This means that the Daily Mail will generally not be referenced as a ‘reliable source’ on English Wikipedia, and volunteer editors are encouraged to change existing citations to the Daily Mail to another source deemed reliable by the community. This is consistent with how Wikipedia editors evaluate and use media outlets in general – with common sense and caution.”
Clearly, for those who believe the carbon dioxide is a pollutant fake premise, and rely on its scare work to ensure funding from dumb politicians, one could say that this is their only valid premise. For it is demonstrably clear that their work’s results demonstrate the problem they claim, and notably those closest to the gravy train.
I don’t think it’s the CO2 but I do think the scientists are hoping it continues. Easier to sell pseudoscience to slow, zombie types.
Obviously, were it not for increasing levels of CO2 they could not have reached the (grindingly stupid) conclusion that they did.
QED
QED is Latin for ‘Well duh!’
That paragon of garbage press, The Guardian, has apparently left the scene with the departure of the reporter who created that rags’ hysterical stories. Not to be deterred, the posters here have found multiple replacement sources for the worst in alarmist Hair-On-Fire garbage to be highlighted.
Of course I am talking about that wonderfully stinky MSM rag, The Daily Mail, and our hard left wing propaganda outlet, The L.A. Times. And to round out a trio, we have EurekAlerts. “Science” reporting written up by “journalists” who do not have even the most basic grasp of the topics they attempt to expound upon. Press reports from EurekAlerts are the closest thing to purely content-free announcements we would ever hope to see. {As an aside, content-free journalism may well be a reflection the content-free education the journalists got at the modern University.}
*******************************************************
I have a proposal.
A Modest Proposal:
{For those who do not know, see Jonathan Swift, author of Gulliver’s Travels, who wrote “A Modest Proposal”, a plan for the treatment of the children of poor people.}
As has been documented above by numerous commenters, CO2 levels must be vastly higher than what is seen, before there any noticeable effects. It is all a basic matter of physiology, and will be well known to any Biology major at a Junior level at any college.
Then, My Modest Proposal:
If a piece makes claims which would make any science majors at GSC (Generic State College) blush in embarrassment, then the piece probably does not rise to the standards to appear here.
Thinking about CO2 obviously makes scientists so dumb and slow they will lie and scam.
Did they measure this or model it? If they measured it did they bother to measure the CO levels? I f they had I might be less skeptical of their conclusions.
Well, Sophie Law For Mailonline, you better inform NASA and the US DoD about this ASAP.
NASA has set the maximum allowable 24-hour average CO2 on board the manned International Space Station at 5,250 ppm (4.0 mmHg). NASA used to have an even higher maximum such limit of 7,000 ppm on the manned ISS.
“Data collected on nine nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines indicate an average CO2 concentration of 3,500 ppm with a range of 0-10,600 ppm, and data collected on 10 nuclear-powered attack submarines indicate an average CO2 concentration of 4,100 ppm with a range of 300-11,300 ppm,” according to a 2007 National Research Council report on exposure issues facing submarine crews. The NRC noted that a “number of studies suggest that CO2 exposures in the range of 15,000-40,000 ppm do not impair neurobehavioral performance.”
I can only speculate that the pragmatism of ISS and Navy submarine operations engineers has discounted all of the dire warnings from CAGW alarmists about humans living with ambient CO2 levels that would make their employees—in tasks of life-or-death decision making—tired, slow and with disrupted memory and concentration.
In other words, good grief!
Exactly. Ambient levels in subs in the low 5 figures are not a worry, and the expectation is that during tests or stress or actual combat higher respiration rates would tend to raise CO2 even higher. The US Navy and US Govt have studied this in detail and there is no loss of memory, mental acuity, concentration, dizziness, or other deleterious effects that would impair a combat crew at anywhere up to 100 times current atmospheric concentration of CO2.
This is simple stuff to find in the literature. How can someone honestly make such ridiculous claims? How can they get published when it is nothing but rubbish?
This is just what we need. Another thing to blame for stupid or lazy behavior.
In the 70’s, I worked for weeks at a time in an atmosphere with CO2 levels that averaged 7000 ppm. Anyone who has served aboard a submarine can attest to the fact that there is no loss of cognitive function even at those extreme levels. You can’t stand watch for twelve hours every day if you’re exhausted from the high CO2 levels. I just throw the BE flag on this study. But it does expose the sad state of peer review in our current climate
Terry Sholes
“Anyone who has served aboard a submarine can attest to the fact that there is no loss of cognitive function even at those extreme levels.”
I’d effing hope not.
Childish wrong articles like the one reported will make people sicker and more stupid than CO2 ever will
I’m wondering how tired I’d be riding a bicycle on a dirt road to do menial labor that some machine does now. That’s stupid. Fossil fuels has made life easy. They seem to be trying to make life difficult.
Sophie should know that the 2.00pm slump is caused by a caffeine crunch.Most caffeine is expelled from the body in about four hours.The 3.00pm break is an hour too far, hence the slump.Move the breaks an hour closer and the problem disappears. Get educated Sophie.
It is possible the “brilliant” journalist read an article on CO poisoning.
Carbon Monoxide Carbon Dioxide….When you are an ace reporter saving the world,whats the difference..?
Carbon Pollution Right?
Every year some poor family will suffer CO poisoning from a furnace/chimney malfunction, losing loved ones or becoming very ill.
And the onset symptoms do make you stupid and ill.
“Surging levels of greenhouses gases are making people tired and stupid, scientists claim.”
Only climate scientists, though.
The Daily Mail (never the most reliable “first draft of history” anyhow!) has recently had an enfoeced personnel change in order to get this still highly popular paper back on message. The outgoing editor ensured we got pro-Brexit stories and AGW realism (remember David Rose?). The “new” Mail has already published several vile articles bleating about second referenda and how good and wise the learned elders of Europe are, and now this. Ah, well, it saves time scanning the newspaper sites in the morning. ;-(
Surging levels of greenhouse gases could make people tired, forgetful and stupid, scientists claim. Afternoon fatigue and lazy could be added.
A big fat lunchtime ‘blunt’ does the same. Whoda thunk it was the greenhouse gases. lol
I didn’t read any of this. Too tired and stupid.
So, the approx. 97% of natural CO2 sources have no effect and do not drive climate change, only our 3%?
That’s what they claim. It doesn’t make much sense, does it. Human-derived CO2 is the gamechanger they think. Why they think that, I don’t know. I’ve seen a couple of times where people tried to make a case for it, but they didn’t make much sense either. 🙂
“Surging levels of greenhouse gases could make people tired, forgetful and stupid, scientists claim.”
These scientists are just looking for a convenient excuse for their own laziness, forgetfulness, and stupidity. When they use a weasel word like “could,” it is merely an opinion or an educated guess at best.
The news item cites ‘ther scientists’ as having written “Human cognitive performance declines with an increase in CO2”. They may well have but even if they did Google can’t find it. How much of this claim is fiction?
It is not fiction, because human cognitive performance does decline with an increase in CO2. And huge surge not only could but would affect humans, not only making humans tired but killing them.
It is just that this fact is completely irrelevant. A huge surge in water would do that. The heck, a huge surge of anything will kill humans. The dose is what makes a poison – though some poisons are extremely poisonous at extremely low levels.
The ASHRE limit for CO2 in a well ventilated room is .1% where as the nominal amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is .04%. The global use of fossil fuels is not having a significant effect on the amount of CO2 that is in a well ventilated room. A primary cause of increased amounts of CO2 in the indoor environment is people and other animals breathing. Breathing should not be made illegal. By far the majority of so called greenhouse gas in our atmosphere is H2O. Before the level of H2O in the atmosphere becomes dangerous to humans it condenses out as a liquid. H2O and CO2 in our atmosphere is required for life as we know it. Many breathing problems that some people have are treated by adding more H2O and CO2 to the air that these people breathe. Both H2O and CO2 are required for good health.
The title is an Own Goal unto itself 🙂
Si monumentim requiris…
We might be able to laugh at this story, but we should recognise that nearly all Daily Mail readers, and indeed the bulk of the population, will take it uncritically at face value, and although they may not feel it a direct threat to themselves, it will still be at the back of their minds when climate policy is addressed in future.
I usually manage to refrain from commenting until I have given the authors the courtesy of my having skimmed their work, but as the DM gives few details and no references, it took quite a while to find the article on which it is based. The abstract of that article makes it clear that it is a far-in-the-future ‘what if’ study without grounding in actual numbers. It states-
………………..”This paper brings together a rapid evidence assessment of impacts of elevated CO2 concentrations on human cognition with IPCC projections of atmospheric CO2 concentration by the end of the present century, and an analysis of potential consequences of increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations for ventilation systems in buildings and other enclosed spaces. Whilst only limited research has been done on the effect of CO2 on cognition (as opposed to air quality in general), half of the studies reviewed indicate that human cognitive performance declines with increasing CO2 concentrations….”
So I had a quick look at the abstracts of some of the “studies reviewed”. Of those I could see, most were culled from papers discussing greenhouse gas emissions (not cognitive effects) but of those visible which did look at medical aspects, none claimed negative effects below 5000ppm and the majority were very clear that negative impacts on ‘human cognitive performance’ were absent even at much higher levels.
Waffle compounded upon rubbish.
mothcatcher, look at the comments at the Daily Mail. People are calling BS big-time.
Don132
Here’s an example of comments, and this is not untypical of the reaction to this piece at the Daily Mail:
“The global warming alarmists are realizing people aren’t buying their rubbish so they are going for far fetched and desperate rubbish like this. People have been tired in the afternoon since the dawn of time. It’s from working all day and having something in your stomach after lunch.”
“No, it is the constant drone of scientists going on about global warming, greenhouse gasses and the need for more and more of our money that is making people tired. They are killing off their argument with their incessant greed and inane remarks.”
If you want to get cheered up a bit, read the comments.
In a way, they are correct
Appealing to The Authority of Me, I have lond asserted that rising atmospheric Carbonoxide is due to farming – especially where land is ploughed, paddied, grubbed, raked, harrowed, rolled to facilitate the growing of annual grasses – as opposed to the perennial plants and grasses that would normally prevail.
Previous civilisations have been very successful at creating deserts just by doing that.
Sheep and goats assisted in no small measure.
Since end of WWII, a new tool was added – ammonia or ammonium nitrate – the product of munitions production and that was no longer needed by the war-machine.
Hence why, on almost every graph of atmospheric carbonoxide concentration, the curve ramps up steeply around the mid to late 1940’s. The nitrogen stimulates the soil bacteria to chew up more dead & buried plant material producing the CO2.
The CO2 is coming out of the dirt – hence why the stomata on most plants are on the underside of their leaves. They expect their ‘food’ to be coming up at them, not down at them.
Of course the burning of stuff, any stuff, in an oxygen/nitrogen mix of gas will produce water-soluble nitrogen which will rain out on the dirt and likewise, promote bacterial activity.
Bacteria are also VERY sensitive to temperature, hence we see this:
From here:
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2017-267&rn=news.xml&rst=6973
The ‘tropical regions’ being the only places (apart from Perma-frozen regions) where, due to farming, there is any significant measure of dead & buried plant material.
To get back on topic and round this thing up – farming is a major emitter of CO2, not especially from all the things warmists like to accuse it of, but from the actions of ploughing, paddying and (nitrogen) fertilising and that sort of farming is to do what……
Grow starch,
Which when husk-removed, ground-up and cooked (the very essence of ‘processing) becomes a mind and body dulling drug. It turns in Glucose – a chemical depressant for critters such as us.
And no, you do not ‘get used to it’
you do not ‘learn to handle it’
you do not ‘get immune to it’
because ‘everyone else is doing it’ does NOT make it any less potent or reduce its brain & body-deadening effect
Hence we see this:
From here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43611527
Those children are not falling asleep because they are hungry.
Hunger actually has the reverse effect – it wakes you up so you become alert to the possibility of finding food.
They are falling asleep because their bloodstreams are chock full of glucose that came from eating highly processed foods, typically laden with refined sugar in the preceding hour or so.
=breakfast.
Those breakfasts would have been cornflakes, Frosties, Coco-Pops, toast with jam/jelly/marmalade – things that are easy to prepare for stressed parents, always in a desperate rush to get to work and things that the kids can and will help themselves to.
So, they seem happy, bright and alert.
Initially
But at 2+ hours, the Dopamine rush has gone, the glucose inside them that hasn’t been processed into fat is monopolising water in their bloodstreams and everywhere.
They are grumpy and hung-over from 09:30 onwards.
But, they universally mistake the ‘thirsty’ signal for the hunger, I want food signal and appear to their teachers to be hungry again.
Not least by the same time, how many of the teachers are under the same malaise – having eaten a high-carb and highly processed breakfast themselves?
A very easy mistake to make – the teachers will never realise what’s happening and its their duty ‘In Loco Parentis’ to recognise what the children need in that situation.
A simple drink of water.
(A small salty & savoury high fat snack (e’g. cheese) would work ABSOLUTE WONDERS – but what’s the chance?)
So they blame the (real) parents
We also get stuff like this happening: (From The Telegraph recently)
Again, they Pass The Buck.
How badly is it possible to Lose The Plot? – they (as teachers) have set themselves up as ‘In Loco Parentis’ but when any tiny problem crops up, they avoid responsibility.
They want all the middle-class well-paid status & salary of being teachers, they cannot handle the responsibility – they don’t even recognise what their own job/vocation involves or even recognise (as basic human animals) what’s going on right in front of their eyes.
Then they deliver the ultimate and it Could Not Get Any Worse.
They accuse children of stealing from them, their parents (In Loco Parentis)
Horrendous, Gobsmacking. Really really sad.
Not only are the rats in the cage starting to eat each other, they are effectively eating each other’s children
Then doctors will come along and assert that The Afternoon Power Nap is actually a good thing.
How wrong is it possible to be.
About Anything
‘scuse the Fat Fingers above ^^ we all know how it is…
anyone see now why ‘science’ is such a train wreck nowadays..
See also:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/nov/29/one-third-18-year-old-university-applicants-get-unconditional-offer
Folks who have completely missed out on education in their first 17 or 18 years are being given Degrees – please tell me NOT in Climate Science (or any science or Heaven Forbid, going on to become teachers, politicians or their advisers)
Jeez after scrolling all the way down, iv’e forgotten what i gonna say now.
It was the CO2, you were warned what would happen. Now what you need to do is go on an immediate emission control CO2 vegan friendly cleansing diet. Then donate all you savings to saving polar bears and greenpeace and you should be on the path to restoring mental function.
Look at the comments at the Daily Mail! For example, and this isn’t an outlier: “It is a long time since I ever read so much scientifically illiterate drivel.”
There’s hope for humanity so long as some of us still have the BS meter functioning.
Don132
Sick building syndrome ?
They sealed the windows of my kid’s school room. We got informed by a plethora of energy saving pamphlets.
Sore throats, red eyes, fatigue quickly ensued.
It took parents quite some legal efforts before normal airing was resumed.
The most positive of it all is that now kids have tasted first hand the oppressive effects of save-the-world lunacy. Good luck talking them into it again.
There should be a warning label placed on these types of articles; Warning – contains Weapons Grade Stupid. Read at your own risk. In fact, I think the Stupid has reached critical mass. Too bad it couldn’t be harnessed somehow.
““Surging levels of greenhouses gases are making people tired and stupid, scientists claim.”
Apparently, the effects are limited to democrats, socialists, progressives, the MSM, and other lefties.
I researched CO2 levels and mammals in the academic literature about 10 years ago. I found:
1. The rodent with the highest life expectancy–Naked Mole Rats–had the highest CO2 levels in their burrows. (8%)
2. Premie human infants are incubated with 7% (70 000 ppm) CO2. Researchers thought that might be a bit high, causing blindness.
3. Submarines’ US standard is 4%.
But as we all know, it is not about the science. This article reveals that the truth will be destroyed for the Narrative. And that could kill people.
I am reminded of a quote from the movie, “Billy Madison”;
(a slightly revised version)
“what you have just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent article were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this chat room is now dumber for having read it.”
The reason why mammals have lungs to breath in air is directly attributable to having CO2 in the bloodstream. Without CO2 in our bodies we stop breathing.
I’m guessing a healthy autocorrelation with liberalism might be in play. Yes, on the submarine we had a somewhat larger concentration of CO2, but I don’t think there any extra stupidity was exhibited. It’s not the best environment for it.
How can we be certain that the “scientists” were not the first victims?
The book “The Oxygen Advantage” states that C02 is needed in the bloodstream in order for hemoglobin to release 02 into the tissues. The sort of paradoxical result is that to increase the 02 in your tissues, you need to increase the C02. The suggestion is breath-holding exercises to increase the C02. Oxygen isn’t the problem, as your blood is usually 98-100% saturated with 02. Maybe more C02 will be beneficial to humanity.
Transfer of O2 from your blood is facilitated by transfer of CO2 from the tissue to the blood. In the lungs the hemoglobin becomes saturated with O2, as the blood passes through the arteries and through the capillaries the O2 saturation drops and the absorption of CO2 facilitates transfer of O2 at these low concentrations to the tissue until the blood CO2 level maximizes and the O2 saturation is close to 0. When the blood is returned via the veins to the lungs the CO2 transfers to the air in the lungs and the O2 saturation returns to 100%.
GHG levels must be ridiculously high in Cali.
Would explain a lot. Or some things.
I wonder if the authors bothered to look at industrial no observable effect levels – NOEL – CO2 levels. Nasa had data: https://www.nap.edu/read/12529/chapter/10 claiming a NOEL of 3%. How does that convert to PPM – about 3000?
30,000.
Well considering that world record in marathon was set this year I doubt co2 levels are having much of an effect on performance.
“Surging levels of greenhouses gases are making people tired and stupid, scientists claim” Not sure about tired, but it is liberals who are making people stupid. Their group think mindset means people are repeating mantras without even knowing what they are claiming to say.
I’m quite sure this person will be running for Congress soon.
SURGING levels. Let’s not forget they’re SURGING. [Do much drama ?]
Smoke stacks in illustration are emitting STEAM. [ So typical, because CO2 is I N V I S I B L E ]
The Daily Fail (I mean “Mail”) does not even reference the exact paper being written about. Here’s the study that I think is being referred to: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0143624418790129
Oh my God! [and I’m not even a dedicated believer]– if you think the story obscurely mentioning (but NOT exactly referencing) the “study” is stupid, then start reading (or trying to read) the actual paper. I could only read so far, as my head-shaking disabled me from continuing [something to do with oscillatory panning exceeding ability of my eyes to lock onto target type face — I’m not an engineer, so I don’t know the real lingo] (^_^).
Anyhow, I was getting the distinct impression that the paper’s authors were bending over backwards and tying themselves into intellectual knots, trying to make their conflation of atmospheric CO2 concentration [read that again, ’cause it’s sort of poetic] and lived-in-structure CO2 concentration come across as an intelligent attempt.
I hope others here confirm my initial impression of the …….. [clear throat many times]… “study”.
“Afternoon fatigue, the slump that office workers often experience, could become a worldwide problem due to surging levels in carbon dioxide.” -> Just stop eating shitty carbohydrates, and while at it stop reading shitty papers.
Feeling Hysterical ? Just breathe into a paper bag for a while. Calm yourself down with the cooling effect of CO2
Surging levels of greenhouse gases are making tired and stupid, scientists claim.
could someone please flip a window!