iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Studies: Fighting Global Warming Reduces Diseases

SETH BORENSTEIN   11/25/09 03:41 PM ET   AP

Global Warming

WASHINGTON — Cutting global warming pollution would not only make the planet healthier, it would make people healthier too, new research suggests.

Slashing carbon dioxide emissions could save millions of lives, mostly by reducing preventable deaths from heart and lung diseases, according to studies released Wednesday and published in a special issue of The Lancet British medical journal.

Global and U.S. health officials unveiled the results as they pushed for health issues to take a more prominent role at upcoming climate change negotiations in Copenhagen. Also on Wednesday, President Barack Obama announced that he would go to Copenhagen at the start of international climate talks. U.S. health officials said the timing was not planned.

"Relying on fossil fuels leads to unhealthy lifestyles, increasing our chances for getting sick and in some cases takes years from our lives," U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a telecast briefing from her home state of Kansas. "As greenhouse gas emissions go down, so do deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. This is not a small effect."

Sebelius, British health officials, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and the head of the World Health Organization all took part in briefings based in Washington and London.

The journal Lancet took an advocacy role in commissioning the studies and timing their release before the Copenhagen summit, but the science was not affected by the intent, said journal editor Dr. Richard Horton.

Instead of looking at the health ills caused by future global warming, as past studies have done, this research looks at the immediate benefits of doing something about the problem, said Linda Birnbaum, director of the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. That agency helped fund the studies along with the Wellcome Trust and several other international public health groups.

The calculations of lives saved were based on computer models that looked at pollution-caused illnesses in certain cities. The figures are also based on the world making dramatic changes in daily life that may at first seem too hard and costly to do, researchers conceded.

Some possible benefits seemed highly speculative, the researchers conceded, based on people driving less and walking and cycling more. Other proposals studied were more concrete and achievable, such as eliminating cook stoves that burn dung, charcoal and other polluting fuels in the developing world.

And cutting carbon dioxide emissions also makes the air cleaner, reducing lung damage for millions of people, doctors said.

"Here are ways you can attack major health problems at the same time as dealing with climate change," said lead author Dr. Paul Wilkinson, an environmental epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

The calculations are based on proposals that would cut global greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2050. To accomplish that, industrialized countries have to cut emissions by 83 percent. Obama's proposal, also unveiled Wednesday with his Copenhagen announcement, is in sync with that.

Wilkinson said the individual studies came up with numbers of premature deaths prevented or extra years of life added for certain locales.

For example, switching to low-polluting cars in London and Delhi, India, would save 160 lost years of life in London and nearly 1,700 in Delhi for every million residents, one study found. But if people also drove less and walked or biked more, those extra saved years would soar to more than 7,300 years in London and 12,500 years in Delhi because of less heart disease.

Outside scientists praised the studies and said the research was sound.

"The science is really excellent; the modeling is quite good," said Dr. Paul Epstein of the Harvard School of Medicine's Center for Health and the Global Environment. "It really takes the whole field a step farther."

___

On the Net:

The Lancet: http://www.lancet.com/

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

Filed by Nick Graham  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 36
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Organic-Guy
Organic Gardener, Carpenter, Philosopher, Agitator
05:59 PM on 11/29/2009
Time we connected the dots. It makes you think and I know that hurts some people's brains but all things are connected and a cascade can happen in a positive way or bad depending on our choices.
Healthy planet, healthy people. One is the other. We are one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DrD
Ph.D. Psychology, Educator, Writer, Inspirer
07:17 PM on 11/26/2009
Healthy People, Healthy Planet. I need a bumper sticker!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:30 AM on 11/25/2009
Whether anyone believes in global warming/climate change is completely irrelevant to our responsibilities as humans. Pollution is real. Everyone agrees. What everyone does not agree about is to what level of severity/importance and who's job it is to do anything about it. Business resist the regulation, many people resist completely the idea that they have ANY responsibility for themselves or their actions, and they will make up all manner of stories and conspiracies to avoid believing they have any responsibility to the world around them.

www.storyofstuff.com
10:44 AM on 11/25/2009
I am stunned by the revelations revealed by the hacked emails concerning climate change. I thought scientists were supposed to be skeptics, not followers. Changing data to prop up conclussions? Where are the investigative reporters?
11:10 AM on 11/25/2009
What are those specific "revelations" that are so stunning? A few scientists arguing about specific studies and methodologies, and fighting personal turf battles on private emails?

Doesn't change the general consensus of the experts and overwhelming body of scientific evidence in the slightest. So some politicians in thrall to industry lobbyists and anti-science right want to make political hay out of this? Fine. That's what they do.

Scientists are human, too, and you will find some with questionable methodology on all sides of any scientific investigation. But at some point, you have to recognize that there is value to the consensus of the credentialled people who have spent their lives in scientific investigation of a subject. If that consensus indicates some change in behavior is warranted, we have a responsibility to act.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoeTheProgrammer
I love dogs.
11:18 AM on 11/25/2009
Let's be clear. It's called FRAUD.

Don't try to sugar coat it.
10:18 AM on 11/25/2009
Wow, the tr*lls are all over this. For the adults in the room, though....

Since air quality index alerts have been issued for decades, warning asthmatics and others with breathing difficulty to stay indoors when particulates are high, especially in urban areas, I don't know why this would comes as a shock (if the science turns out to support it- not that this matters to the anti-science ideologues).

Another type of health threat where climate change is involved is infectious disease. For instance, slightly warmer coastal waters in South America (due to current shifts from El Nino, etc.) are known to have increased the incidence of infectious diseases like cholera. When water temperatures increase enough globally, the effects could be daunting. And the insect population increases exponentially when there is just a slight increase in the earth's average annual temperature.

It's hard to understand the selfishness of people who are not even willing to consider the long-term effects of our behavior on the planet and future generations. Of course, if you believe the earth is just a few thousand years old and you're waiting for the rapture, there's probably no reaching you. But the rest of us have an responsibility to, at the very least, listen to the evidence of the actual experts.
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
10:00 AM on 11/25/2009
If you do a search on "Lancet British medical journal" you can find their web site. There are several papers looking at the health benefits they may accrue from and possibly mitigate the cost of changes in policies for energy production and use. All the papers are available for down load.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nootrope
I only have a macro-bio
10:16 AM on 11/25/2009
It's also linked to directly at the bottom of the article. ;-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nootrope
I only have a macro-bio
09:56 AM on 11/25/2009
A lot of lazy, selfish fat4sses out there who want to keep hurting others just so corporate oil goons like the bu.$h family can make more money. Sick.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Uggg
10:19 AM on 11/25/2009
Tell that coment to India and China they are the largest polutersin the world and they will not change
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:25 AM on 11/25/2009
Tell that to the Americans who have their 401k's, IRA's, and brokerage accounts heavily invested in India and China.
09:55 AM on 11/25/2009
CBS News online:

A few days after leaked e-mail messages appeared on the Internet which came from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in eastern England, the U.S. Congress may probe whether prominent scientists who are advocates of global warming theories misrepresented the truth about climate change.

This is what most have been saying for a long time, there is no such thing as man made global warming and the MSM is keeping a lid on it just like the true cost of congressional health care bill along with cap & trade.

FOX is the only place you can find honest reporting
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
09:55 AM on 11/25/2009
I prefer this version:

"Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: low-carbon electricity generation

A. Markandya et. al.

Summary
In this report, the third in this Series on health and climate change, we assess the changes in particle air pollution emissions and consequent effects on health that are likely to result from greenhouse-gas mitigation measures in the electricity generation sector in the European Union (EU), China, and India. We model the effect in 2030 of policies that aim to reduce total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 50% by 2050 globally compared with the effect of emissions in 1990. We use three models: the POLES model, which identifies the distribution of production modes that give the desired CO2 reductions and associated costs; the GAINS model, which estimates fine particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter 2·5 μm or less (PM2·5) concentrations; and a model to estimate the effect of PM2·5 on mortality on the basis of the WHO's Comparative Risk Assessment methods. Changes in modes of production of electricity to reduce CO2 emissions would, in all regions, reduce PM2·5 and deaths caused by it, with the greatest effect in India and the smallest in the EU. Health benefits greatly offset costs of greenhouse-gas mitigation, especially in India where pollution is high and costs of mitigation are low. Our estimates are approximations but suggest clear health gains (co-benefits) through decarbonising electricity production, and provide additional information about the extent of such gains."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ramirez
Taxpayer-American
09:48 AM on 11/25/2009
Article says that cutting global warming emissions reduce diseases. Hmm. Okay, could be.

Headline says that FIGHTING global waming reduces diseases. It's all about your attitude.

Gimme a break.
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
09:46 AM on 11/25/2009
This article is sloppy. Some readers might be led to believe there is a causal relationship between different effects of policies rather than simply a correlation because of the methods employed.

Shutting down a coal fired power plant will certainly reduce both the particulate and carbon dioxide emmisions from that plant but it is also possible to keep the plant open and reduce particulate emissions without reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

It is also possible to replace a coal fired power plant with a nuclear power plant which produces different kinds of environmental and possible health impacts.

I suspect the real report is much more precise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Uggg
09:37 AM on 11/25/2009
oh yea and dont forget the lightbulbs that require a Haz Mat team to dispose of
09:47 AM on 11/25/2009
Just like all the fluorescent tube lamps we've been using for many decades without problems...
09:36 AM on 11/25/2009
this study brought to you from the folks at UAE
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Uggg
09:38 AM on 11/25/2009
and UN
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Uggg
09:34 AM on 11/25/2009
Let me get this straight we can’t eat meat we can not Bar B Q now we can not have cars according to the article, and this will make us live longer, Heck no I am going to BBQ my Steak on my Grill with charcoal Yum Yum then run up and down the road in my 1969 Cadi
09:28 AM on 11/25/2009
funny the HuffPuff hasn't mentioned the global warming email links that expose the global warming fraud created by the top global warming community....
09:35 AM on 11/25/2009
I was just as Shocked also