Categories: What the Health?

Death by global warming: Quebecers at risk

Global warming doesn’t just put polar bears at risk. Researchers at Quebec City’s Université…

by Kate Lunau on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:52am - 0 Comments

Global warming doesn’t just put polar bears at risk. Researchers at Quebec City’s Université Laval predict that, by the year 2080, the province could see its mortality rate jump by up to 15 per cent in the summer months—meaning an extra 540 deaths per summer in Montreal alone, compared to the city’s 1981-1999 average (see graph below). This isn’t a new concept—studies in the U.K. have shown similar results for summer mortality, The National Review of Medicine reports.

Tags: climate change, global warming, Pierre Gosselin, Quebec

More by Kate Lunau

http://dandylittlecdnblog.blogspot.com d. andy jette

I remember reading the horror of the heat wave in France a couple of years ago. Since then, each summer, just a little bit more than the last, I worry about my folks getting caught in a 2003-style blackout with sweltering heat and no air conditioning. This isn’t alarmism. This is basic science.
Raven

It is amazing the junk that passes as science nowadays.

Canadians adapted to the cold and they will adapt easily to the heat. The 2003 heat wave in France caught people by surprise. By 2006 they were more than able to cope with a similar heat wave. http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/02/14/few-french-fried-in-2006/
Earl E

I’ll bet those people were not surprised that the cyclone flooded their rice patties either. I’ll bet they won’t be surprised when malnitrition and disease sweep through the survivors and pick off the weak, old, and young.
Not being surprised by extreme weather doesn’t help survive it.
I won’t be surprised when they start rationing petrol.
I won’t be surprised when the corn crops this yeAR ARE HALF WHAT THEY WERE LAST YEAR.
I’ll bet the corn isn’t surprised as it rotted this spring.
Its amazing what science is passed off as junk these days.
jcl

Global cooling will kill more….wait for it…..try doing some reading on sunspots and solar cycles. We’re headed for a loooongg cold spell that will kill many more millions than a slight warming ever would.
Toby

I prefer the imperfect science of international panels and academic researchers to the science of strong opinion that populates blogs and letters to the editor.
Raven

Toby says:
“I prefer the imperfect science of international panels and academic researchers to the science of strong opinion that populates blogs and letters to the editor”

The IPCC science is assembled by a group of researchers with an agenda. They routinely ignore or minimize science that casts doubt on their claims and defend bad science long after it has been totally discredited (a.k.a the ‘hockey stick’).

The IPCC and the group of scientists and bureaucrats that run it are as trustworthy as the directors of Enron.
Raven

Earl E says:
“I’ll bet those people were not surprised that the cyclone flooded their rice patties”

What’s your point? A relativily weak cyclone hit an area that is prone to cyclones? That tragegy is as surprising and as preventable as an earthquake.

People who claim that there is a proven link between weather extremes and GW don’t know what they are talking about. When it comes to those kinds of effects the science is definitely not settled.
T. Thwim

Raven: We typically call this a conspiracy theory. It implies that somehow, this huge group of scientists, which includes the American Geophysical Union, the IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Society, the American Association for the Advancment of Science, the American Meteorological Society, and even those in the Pentagon, are somehow all marching in lockstep to some unknown drummer who is telling them to spread the climate change message.

Of course people shouldn’t claim a proven link. Science doesn’t prove things. Science proves things that aren’t. In the case of climate change, science has proven that it’s not all natural, it’s not the sun, it’s not cosmic rays, and that nothing else fits the changes we are seeing better than human generated CO2.

I’d point you to this link by the Royal Society, http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?tip=1&id=6777 to help to prove it for you, but no doubt you’d think that they’ll track your internet and send the black vans to take away your tinfoil hat.
Raven

T. Thwim says:
“In the case of climate change, science has proven that it’s not all natural, it’s not the sun, it’s not cosmic rays, and that nothing else fits the changes we are seeing better than human generated CO2.”

Actually that statement is completely false. Neither the sun nor natural variations can be ruled about as possible explanations. More importantly, there are many inconsistencies between the actual data and the CO2 hypothesis which are conveniently ignored. These inconsistenties are as least as significant as the issues raised wrt the various alternate hypothesis. The attribution studies in the IPCC reports are excercises in circular logic that mean nothing to anyone who has not concluded in advance that CO2 to blame.

In any case, the real issue is whether warming is a bad thing (whether it is caused by CO2 or not). Studies like the one mentioned on this blog are exercises in propoganda that don’t deserve to be called science. You don’t have to be a scientist to realize the absurd nature of the claim that adapting to the heat is more of a challenge that adapting to cold.
Dan L

Raven says:
“Actually that statement is completely false. Neither the sun nor natural variations can be ruled about as possible explanations. More importantly, there are many inconsistencies between the actual data and the CO2 hypothesis which are conveniently ignored.”

By claiming that scientists have an agenda (“inconsistencies… that are conveniently ignored.”) you have effectively proven T. Thwim’s point. Bravo! You are officially a conspiracy theorist.
Raven

Dan L says:
“By claiming that scientists have an agenda (”inconsistencies… that are conveniently ignored.”) you have effectively proven T. Thwim’s point. Bravo! You are officially a conspiracy theorist.”

Accusing people of being well meaning zealots with tunnel vision does not mean there is a conspiracy going on. There is a lot of evidence that demonstrates that scientists involved in the IPCC believe they are on a mission to save humanity from itself and that they are more than willing to spin the science in a way that supports their views. Sometimes the cross the line into outright fraud, however, most of the time it is simply the blindness that comes with strong convictions.

That is why we should not be making policy decisions based simply on the opinion of the IPCC.