Climate change exposes future generations to life-long health harm

[webfact]

Climate change exposes future generations to life-long health harm

By Kate Kelland

 

FILE PHOTO: A protestor holds a placard in front of the India Gate during a protest demanding government to take immediate steps to control air pollution in New Delhi, India, November 5, 2019. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi/File Photo

 

LONDON (Reuters) - A child born today faces multiple and life-long health harms from climate change - growing up in a warmer world with risks of food shortages, infectious diseases, floods and extreme heat, a major global study has found.

 

Climate change is already harming people's health by increasing the number of extreme weather events and exacerbating air pollution, according to the study published in The Lancet medical journal. And if nothing is done to mitigate it, its impacts could burden an entire generation with disease and illness throughout their lives.

 

"Children are particularly vulnerable to the health risks of a changing climate. Their bodies and immune systems are still developing, leaving them more susceptible to disease and environmental pollutants," said Nick Watts, who co-led The Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change study.

 

He warned that health damage in early childhood is "persistent and pervasive", and carries lifelong consequences.

 

"Without immediate action from all countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions, gains in wellbeing and life expectancy will be compromised, and climate change will come to define the health of an entire generation," he told a London briefing.

 

Yet introducing policies to limit emissions and cap global warming would see a different outcome, the research teams said.

 

In that scenario, a child born today, would see an end to coal use in Britain, for example, by their 6th birthday, and the world reaching net-zero emissions by the time they were 31.

 

VULNERABLE

The Lancet study is a collaboration by 120 experts from 35 institutions including the World Health Organization, the World Bank, University College London and China's Tsinghua University.

 

On a "business-as-usual" pathway, with little action to limit climate change, it found that amid rising temperatures and extreme weather events, children would be vulnerable to malnutrition and rising food prices, and the most likely to suffer from warmer waters and climates accelerating the spread of infectious diseases such as dengue fever and cholera.

 

Among the most immediate and long-lasting health threats from climate change is air pollution, the researchers said.

 

They called for urgent action to reduce outdoor and indoor pollution through the introduction of cleaner fuels and vehicles, and policies to encourage safe and active transport such as walking and cycling.

 

The WHO says that globally in 2016, 7 million deaths were due to the effects of household and ambient air pollution. The vast majority of these were in low and middle-income countries.

 

"If we want to protect our children, we need to make sure the air they breathe isn't toxic," said Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson, a global health specialist at Britain's Sussex University who worked on the Lancet study.

 

(Reporting by Kate Kelland, editing by Alexandra Hudson)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-11-14

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[4MyEgo]

"For the love of money is the root of all evil", but the rich get richer, and future generations get the picture, so to speak.

Edited November 14, 2019 by 4MyEgo

[Tippaporn]

"Children are particularly vulnerable to the health risks of a changing climate."

 

"If we want to protect our children, we need to make sure the air they breathe isn't toxic," . . . 

 

It's always the children.  A great tactic designed to pull at the heartstrings thereby gaining support and suppress any arguments to the contrary for if you do you will be accused of unforgivable callousness towards the poor, vulnerable, innocent children.

 

LOL

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

[BritManToo]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

LONDON (Reuters) - A child born today faces multiple and life-long health harms from climate change - growing up in a warmer world with risks of food shortages, infectious diseases, floods and extreme heat, a major global study has found

Strange that child mortality in the western world is at an all time low then.

Would have thought more kids would be dying if the headline were in any way true, and not just fake news.

 

Where are there any food shortages?

Where is there an increase of kids dying from infectious disease?

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by BritManToo

[Tug]

Most of the National sayers are aging out they don’t care I do it’s going to be hard to change away from to much reliance on fossil fuel and evolve towards renewables but we must

[BobBKK]

Climate change is THE problem of our times. To deny the changes we bring to our once beautiful earth is very Flat Earth thinking.

[Tippaporn]

49 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Climate change is THE problem of our times. To deny the changes we bring to our once beautiful earth is very Flat Earth thinking.

Scientists cannot accurately predict what the weather will be like a month from today.  Yet they can predict what the climate will be 30~100 years from now?

 

Do you see the contradiction?

 

I would love to see them make short term, yearly predictions.  In a short span of time, and on a yearly basis, we would be able to see how accurate their short term predictions are.  If they aren't accurate over a period of short years then we can dismiss their long term predictions once and for all.  I doubt they would agree to be tested in such a way.

 

Of course, we've already blown past many of their prediction dates and they've all been wrong.  (Google "climate predication dates that failed" and you'll find enough articles.)  Come to think of it, they have not had a single one of their prior predictions come true.  And yet we're expected to continue to believe their "latest" doom and gloom predictions?  And we're supposed to believe that "the science is settled?"  Despite the fact, too, that they continually come up with "new data," outright admitting that their "old" assumptions were incorrect, and their "new" data is even more ominous than their previous miscalculations?

 

I don't know about anyone else here but common sense tells me . . . 

 

And the kicker?  They need our money.  LOL

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by Tippaporn

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

Climate change is THE problem of our times. To deny the changes we bring to our once beautiful earth is very Flat Earth thinking.

Not at all. The major problems of our times, excluding military and terrorist conflicts, are:

 

(1) The 'real' pollution from vehicles and coal-fired power station with poor quality and inadequate emission controls in order to lower the cost.

 

(2) The disrespect for the environment by ordinary people who thoughtlessly discard plastic bottles and other waste into the natural environment because they can't be bothered to take the waste back with them to dispose of properly.

 

(3) The failure of certain governments or local councils to provide proper waste-disposal and recycling services.

 

(4) The failure of certain governments to prevent the regular burn-off practices of farmers before each planting season, and prevent the removal of yet more forests for agriculture.

 

(5) The damage to the environment from large corporations who discharge chemical waste onto the land or into the rivers and sea.

 

(6) The failure of local governments to consider the history of extreme weather events in their area and take appropriate action to protect the population from floods, droughts and hurricanes, by building more flood-mitigation dams, and/or ensuring that all dwellings are constructed above the levels of previous floods, and that all dwellings are built to withstand the force of previous, known hurricanes that are in the historical record.

 

(7) And perhaps the biggest problem of all, the misinformation provided by the media in associating all of the above problems with mankind's emissions of CO2, as though reducing CO2 emissions will solve the problems.

[ivor bigun]

1 hour ago, BobBKK said:

Climate change is THE problem of our times. To deny the changes we bring to our once beautiful earth is very Flat Earth thinking.

climate change has always happened ,always will ,the problem is too many people 7 billion now 12 billion by 2050.

[isaanistical]

21 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

perhaps the biggest problem of all, the misinformation provided by the media in associating all of the above problems with mankind's emissions of CO2, as though reducing CO2 emissions will solve the problems.

Agree with these, but surely the biggest problem is overpopulation. These "future generations" are just too big. In my lifetime, temperatures have risen by about one percent, while the world's population has trebled.

[VincentRJ]

33 minutes ago, isaanistical said:

Agree with these, but surely the biggest problem is overpopulation. These "future generations" are just too big. In my lifetime, temperatures have risen by about one percent, while the world's population has trebled.

My impression is that population growth slows down as countries develop economically. The two countries with the largest populations are China and India.

 

https://ourworldindata.org/indias-population-growth-will-come-to-an-end
 

"Here we see that the number of children under the age of five (under-5s) peaked in 2007; since then the number has been falling. The number of Indians under 15 years old peaked slightly later (in 2011) and is now also declining."

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/17/world/asia/china-population-crisis.html
 

"On Monday, the National Bureau of Statistics announced that the total number of births in 2018 fell to 15.2 million, a drop of nearly 12 percent nationally. Some cities and provinces have reported declines in local birth rates of as much as 35 percent."

[Lacessit]

The problem is not carbon dioxide emissions. The problem is heat. Basic thermodynamics. Which has been removed from many syllabuses ( Or syllabi, for the purists ) as being too difficult for undergraduates.

 

Since the Industrial Revolution, mankind has been generating electricity and burning fuels to power vehicles. That produces heat. It has to go somewhere. The oceans absorb it in accordance with the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

So far, the trend of rising ocean temperatures has been very small because the Western civilisations producing said heat are only about 30% of the world population. The big change has taken place over the past 3 or 4 decades. China and India have an exponentially increasing middle class, and they are demanding the same standard of living and personal mobility the Western world takes for granted. More heat being produced.

It's somewhat ironic hydrogen-fuelled cars can alleviate carbon dioxide emissions. They won't do anything to help the heat problem.

I can't comment on the health effects. As other posters have noted, the human life span in many countries is as high now as it has ever been. However, I can say warming oceans mean melting ice caps, sea level rises and more intense weather events. Anyone who says that's part of a natural cycle is sticking their head in the sand.

The climate change we are seeing is the first that is man-made. Adapt or die.

 

[Tippaporn]

Here's my donation to fixing climate change . . . . 100 trillion dollars.  Should cover it but if you need more I can spare a little extra.

 

 

It would be different if the climate alarmists would simply propose ways of cleaning up the mess we're creating or suggest beneficial changes we might make.  But as soon as they start with the taxation schemes I see it as a con.

 

Of all of the money which will flow into governments treasury coffers to combat climate change every last penny will be spent towards that effort.  Everyone who believes that react with a heart.  And if you don't react with a sad face.

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Here's my donation to fixing climate change . . . . 100 trillion dollars.  Should cover it but if you need more I can spare a little extra.

 

 

It would be different if the climate alarmists would simply propose ways of cleaning up the mess we're creating or suggest beneficial changes we might make.  But as soon as they start with the taxation schemes I see it as a con.

 

Of all of the money which will flow into governments treasury coffers to combat climate change every last penny will be spent towards that effort.  Everyone who believes that react with a heart.  And if you don't react with a sad face.

 

37 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

The problem is not carbon dioxide emissions. The problem is heat. Basic thermodynamics. Which has been removed from many syllabuses ( Or syllabi, for the purists ) as being too difficult for undergraduates.

 

Since the Industrial Revolution, mankind has been generating electricity and burning fuels to power vehicles. That produces heat. It has to go somewhere. The oceans absorb it in accordance with the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

So far, the trend of rising ocean temperatures has been very small because the Western civilisations producing said heat are only about 30% of the world population. The big change has taken place over the past 3 or 4 decades. China and India have an exponentially increasing middle class, and they are demanding the same standard of living and personal mobility the Western world takes for granted. More heat being produced.

It's somewhat ironic hydrogen-fuelled cars can alleviate carbon dioxide emissions. They won't do anything to help the heat problem.

I can't comment on the health effects. As other posters have noted, the human life span in many countries is as high now as it has ever been. However, I can say warming oceans mean melting ice caps, sea level rises and more intense weather events. Anyone who says that's part of a natural cycle is sticking their head in the sand.

The climate change we are seeing is the first that is man-made. Adapt or die.

 

How much heat do you think the human activities have produced compared to the total amount of heat created by solar emissions and volcanism?  Are there any scientists at all who back up this contention of yours?

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Here's my donation to fixing climate change . . . . 100 trillion dollars.  Should cover it but if you need more I can spare a little extra.

 

 

It would be different if the climate alarmists would simply propose ways of cleaning up the mess we're creating or suggest beneficial changes we might make.  But as soon as they start with the taxation schemes I see it as a con.

 

Of all of the money which will flow into governments treasury coffers to combat climate change every last penny will be spent towards that effort.  Everyone who believes that react with a heart.  And if you don't react with a sad face.

I know what you mean. Look at all the government money in the USA wasted on reducing pollution. What a failure!

https://www.epa.gov/transportation-air-pollution-and-climate-change/accomplishments-and-success-air-pollution-transportation

You'll not that at the same time that GDP increased by 153%,  and the us population increased by 41%, aggregate emissions declined by 65%

 

And according to the IMF, the world is paying about 5 trillion dollars per year subsidizing fossil fuels. Including 649 billion dollars per year in the USA.

 

This paper updates estimates of fossil fuel subsidies, defined as fuel consumption times the gap between existing and efficient prices (i.e., prices warranted by supply costs, environmental costs, and revenue considerations), for 191 countries. Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017. The largest subsidizers in 2015 were China ($1.4 trillion), United States ($649 billion), Russia ($551 billion), European Union ($289 billion), and India ($209 billion). About three quarters of global subsidies are due to domestic factors—energy pricing reform thus remains largely in countries’ own national interest—while coal and petroleum together account for 85 percent of global subsidies. 

https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Global-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Remain-Large-An-Update-Based-on-Country-Level-Estimates-46509

 

 

[Lacessit]

38 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

 

How much heat do you think the human activities have produced compared to the total amount of heat created by solar emissions and volcanism?  Are there any scientists at all who back up this contention of yours?

Only about 95% of them. Scientists understand thermodynamics. politicians and laypeople don't.

The overall ocean temperature has risen by approximately 1 degree Centigrade since the Industrial Revolution. You may say that's a piffling amount.

However, to put it in perspective, what volume of water do the oceans contain? Best estimate is 1.3 to 1.5 billion cubic kilometres.

It takes 1 calorie of energy to raise the temperature of 1 gram ( or CC ) of water by 1 degree Centigrade. Do the math, and that's a lot of heat the oceans are storing. 1 cubic kilometre is storing 1 E 15 EXTRA calories.

Sure, solar energy and volcanism contribute heat. The difference this time around is for the first time in human history we are making a substantial heat contribution. And it's accelerating, as populations grow and demand more of the toys we have.

[WeekendRaider]

future generations?

 

just like the the USA "Climate Believers" who "believe" this is only about some ice melting.... in 2100 something.  vote for The Dems!  they will sign some more international agreements and (i) do nothing real and (ii) make sure aviation is exempt from everything except some "CORSIA offsets"... beginning in 2027... on SOME air travel.  and maybe also talk about their "lost dreams".  blah blah blah blah.  folks that have not read anything... that was peer reviewed... since 2012... and certainly not anything in 2019, beginning with Rosenfeld et. al. in Science, February 2019.    

WHAT future generations? of green mold? 

 

vote Trump 2020.  and finish that improved border wall.... for bottom of the totem pole Climate refugees from Mexico and upper South Amerikee.

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by WeekendRaider

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Strange that child mortality in the western world is at an all time low then.

Would have thought more kids would be dying if the headline were in any way true, and not just fake news.

 

Where are there any food shortages?

Where is there an increase of kids dying from infectious disease?

 

Child mortality rate and food shortages will increase, but not because of increased CO2. It will happen because too many people are being born.

Increased CO2 will actually help grow more crops, as all life depends on CO2 and there isn't enough of it in the atmosphere.

 

The rate of death from infectious diseases will escalate as more bugs become resistant to antibiotics, caused by human misuse of antibiotics.

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, WeekendRaider said:

future generations?

 

must be the USA "Climate Believers" who "believe" this is only about some ice melting.... in 2100 something.  vote for The Dems!  they will sign some more international agreements and (i) do nothing real and (ii) make sure aviation is exempt from everything except some "CORSIA offsets"... beginning in 2027... on SOME air travel.  and maybe also talk about their "lost dreams".  blah blah blah blah.  folks that have not read anything... that was peer reviewed... since 2012... and certainly not anything in 2019, beginning with Rosenfeld et. al. in Science, February 2019.    

WHAT future generations? of green mold? 

Here's a quote from Rosenfeld:

"For Rosenfeld, this discrepancy might point to an ever deeper and more troubling reality. "If the aerosols indeed cause a greater cooling effect than previously estimated, then the warming effect of the greenhouse gases has also been larger than we thought, enabling greenhouse gas emissions to overcome the cooling effect of ahttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190122104611.htmerosols and points to a greater amount of global warming than we previously thought," he shared."

 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

My impression is that population growth slows down as countries develop economically. The two countries with the largest populations are China and India.

 

https://ourworldindata.org/indias-population-growth-will-come-to-an-end
 

"Here we see that the number of children under the age of five (under-5s) peaked in 2007; since then the number has been falling. The number of Indians under 15 years old peaked slightly later (in 2011) and is now also declining."

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/17/world/asia/china-population-crisis.html
 

"On Monday, the National Bureau of Statistics announced that the total number of births in 2018 fell to 15.2 million, a drop of nearly 12 percent nationally. Some cities and provinces have reported declines in local birth rates of as much as 35 percent."

The problem is that ?billions have yet to reach breeding age. Once they do, expect another surge in population, and so it goes, ever increasing.

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Child mortality rate and food shortages will increase, but not because of increased CO2. It will happen because too many people are being born.

Increased CO2 will actually help grow more crops, as all life depends on CO2 and there isn't enough of it in the atmosphere.

 

The rate of death from infectious diseases will escalate as more bugs become resistant to antibiotics, caused by human misuse of antibiotics.

Less Nutritious Grains May Be In Our Future

In the future, Earth's atmosphere is likely to include a whole lot more carbon dioxide. And many have been puzzling over what that may mean for the future of food crops. Now, scientists are reporting that some of the world's most important crops contain fewer crucial nutrients when they grow in such an environment.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/05/08/310473928/less-nutritious-grains-may-be-in-our-future

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Less Nutritious Grains May Be In Our Future

In the future, Earth's atmosphere is likely to include a whole lot more carbon dioxide. And many have been puzzling over what that may mean for the future of food crops. Now, scientists are reporting that some of the world's most important crops contain fewer crucial nutrients when they grow in such an environment.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/05/08/310473928/less-nutritious-grains-may-be-in-our-future

 

 

And many have been puzzling over what that may mean for the future of food crops.

 

As usual, MAY! Given the overwhelming population explosion, we MAY be eating processed seaweed and insects in the not too distant future.

[bristolboy]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

And many have been puzzling over what that may mean for the future of food crops.

 

As usual, MAY! Given the overwhelming population explosion, we MAY be eating processed seaweed and insects in the not too distant future.

Had you read the article, you would know that the "may" isn't about the effects of CO2 on those crops.

[ballpoint]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

And many have been puzzling over what that may mean for the future of food crops.

 

As usual, MAY! Given the overwhelming population explosion, we MAY be eating processed seaweed and insects in the not too distant future.

MAY?  Not too distant future?  The future is here.

 

[Scot123]

Isn't it sad that you get called stupid, ignorant, old and the new one flat earthers oh and old and dying out by people who are so can't pick up a book and read, study and draw their own conclusions. To question why every single one of Al gore's predictions never happened and when global warming was proved a lie changed the name to climate change something that has been occurring since the birth of the earth that the sun is 97% responsible for. Now we see global warming raising its head again thinking people have forgotten. Why don't these nutters go back to street corners with their signs stating the world is ending. Who really are the idiots here? Oh word is ending in 10 years so let's party!!!!!!!! When banks stop giving 25 year even 50 year mortgages then come back lol miami along with every beach property in the world now you can not get mortgages for...... Wait a minute YES YOU CAN!!! 

[Krataiboy]

8 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

"Children are particularly vulnerable to the health risks of a changing climate."

 

"If we want to protect our children, we need to make sure the air they breathe isn't toxic," . . . 

 

It's always the children.  A great tactic designed to pull at the heartstrings thereby gaining support and suppress any arguments to the contrary for if you do you will be accused of unforgivable callousness towards the poor, vulnerable, innocent children.

 

LOL

Anyone living here, whether they have children or not, must be aware that in many towns and cities the air is already unfit to breathe. Action needs to be taken now to protect the present population and future generations. 

 

The hazards of climate change are less prescient than little Greta and her green army of alarmists would have us believe and can be tackled with a phased response, using emerging "green" technologies   

 

This, however, is no excuse for delaying sensible action to clean Thailand's polluted air

 and reduce the environmental impact of plastic - which, thankfully, the current administration is committed to do.

[VincentRJ]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The problem is that ?billions have yet to reach breeding age. Once they do, expect another surge in population, and so it goes, ever increasing.

If you read the articles I linked, you'd have understood this is not the prediction. The concern now is that the current breeding population will not produce enough offspring to support their parents with a good lifestyle as they age, retire and live longer due to advances in medication.

 

Japan is an example of the result of advanced economic growth which seem to reduce the feeling of need for large families that poor people used to have because child mortality was high and there was no social system to support them in their old age.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_Japan

[howbri]

9 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

"Children are particularly vulnerable to the health risks of a changing climate."

 

"If we want to protect our children, we need to make sure the air they breathe isn't toxic," . . . 

 

It's always the children.  A great tactic designed to pull at the heartstrings thereby gaining support and suppress any arguments to the contrary for if you do you will be accused of unforgivable callousness towards the poor, vulnerable, innocent children.

 

LOL

The same people that say "it's for the children" don't hesitate to promote or practice the killing of millions of babies in the womb. Hypocrites!!

[phantomfiddler]

6 hours ago, ivor bigun said:

climate change has always happened ,always will ,the problem is too many people 7 billion now 12 billion by 2050.

I agree, has been happening in cycles for millions of years. The BIG problem is pollution of the environment, which has to be reduced or we are all doomed.