"The new study found that temperature rises had a significant impact on the number of pre-schoolers presenting to emergency departments for fever and gastroenteritis."

Might these temperature rises have anything to do with...SUMMER?!

JFNK-

It's like my first stats proff said:

* More people drink Coke in New York during the Summer

* Murder rates go up in New York during the Summer.

Therefore, Coke a Cola must make people into killers.

That's why I only drink Pepsi!

I totally agree a 2-year study for anything "scientific" is pretty much a joke.

However, Paul, years ago my infant became ill with meningitis in late June...The pediatricians in Indianapolis's largest hospital told me the early summer is when hospitals are filled with children ill with viral/bacterial diseases. This (late-May thru mid-July) is when viruses, etc. are most prevalent. I believe they added being cooped up in the winter at schools, etc., is what makes the numbers of illnesses higher at that time...reason being the close contact to spread illnesses, not the amount of germs.

It appears that the authors of the study agree with you:

"It really demonstrates the urgent need for a more thorough investigation into how exactly climate change will affect health in childhood."

Why did you leave this part out?

This is what passes for news today....

That's bad enough, but the real problem is that's what passes for science nowadays.

Diane,

I don't think you meant to do it but you proved my point....

Other environmental factors certainly could have caused the (minimal) increase in these two reasons for admissions.

In New Orleans it is very common for people to get sick after Mardi Gras. It has nothing to do with the plastic beads coming off the float.

BarneyG2000, that's B.S.

The story was not worth the time it took to print it out the laser printer.

They throw that line in to ask for more funding. They deserve none.

Mac you are ABSOLUTELY correct. I'm planning on graphically illustrating that point soon. I was going to do it on this post but I got bored. ;-)

Does this mean that fewer people got sick during the Ice Age? It took over 30 years to allow DDT use again in malaria-infested places, thanks to people more concerned about the environment than humans. Germs will be passed in enclosed environments much more easily than outdoors. The only ailments dependent on outdoor temperatures are frostbite and heat stroke. And malaria, which we are finally fighting again.

"It really demonstrates the urgent need for a more thorough investigation into how exactly climate change will affect health in childhood."

Why did you leave this part out?

That's simple Barney. It's because this study is proof of absolutely nothing, let alone any sort of link between Global Warming and a child's health. Of course by child I mean someone between 3 and 5 yrs. old.

You ignore that this study proves absolutely nothing, as shown by Paul, and instead try to catch him with some "gotch" quote he left out. Just shows how much you are willing to ignore so as not to speak badly of your global warming religion.

And the quote that Barney chose to include does point out the real reason for the "global warming" hysteria being pushed by the "scientific" community. It's all about money. They want it.

There is one thing the study conclusively proves beyond a shadow of a doubt in correlating to global warming. It's obvious from this study there is a direct link between the amount of funding asked for and provided and the claim that is something is impacted by global warming are directly related.

"It really demonstrates the urgent need for a more thorough investigation into how exactly climate change will affect health in childhood."

Why did you leave this part out?
Posted by: BarneyG200

Actually, the real question is: Why isn't that point the main thrust of the article?

This is what passes for news today....

This is what has passed for news for over a hundred years. The first time the New York Times started with this climate change scaremongering was 1895. That's not a typo. Eighteen ninety-five. They've been alternating between warming and cooling.

When will people catch on?

Barney, lol!

This story about how the Colorado River is drying up won't be as easy to ridicule.

Lake Mead is disappearing as well as you can see here. It's amazing to see how far the water level has fallen. I used to ski Lake Mead as a kid.

All of this is really disturbing. If you live in the Southwest this will have a serious impact on your quality of life in the not-too-distant future.

Great link Laura. Whether it's global warming or cooling the media reports it as a coming disaster. It's nice to know that after 100 years of mechanized forestry, mining, farming, and large scale oil production we have now achieved the optimal climate.

Larkin, the story you link to does not need to be explained away. The story lists 2 factors responsible for the lowering of the river, one of which is the growing population in the area (more than 40%) and in one area a doubling of the water usage. Gee you think maybe that is more of an issue, especially when you are in such an arid area to begin with? Not sure if you've been to Arizona or Nevada, but they are not exactly overflowing with vegetation.

And of course, this report does not link the growing temps with man-made global warming, which is what the IPCC and alarmists are all claiming. Using this story just continues the use of scare tactics with nothing to back it up when it comes to GW.

Of course, you could be bringing this up for other reasons, but I assumed you are using it to trump the story Paul posted about.

Rather than ridicule the articles you link to, Larkin, (which I believe would be pointless as they have nothing to do with "global warming") I'd just like to point out that by linking to articles about a drought (which are normal occurances for the last, oh I don't know, maybe 3 billion years) in a thread about "global warming" you actually ridicle yourself.

And yes, I know it's blasphemy to talk this way about your far leftist religious beliefs...

Larkin,

What's your point?

If you read all of what's on the NASA link, you will see that there have been two far worse declines in the level of Lake Mead, one in the 1950's and one in the 1960's.

Lake Mead recovered from both.

BarneyG2000, Paul is absolutely correct. Working in science myself, the life science field is becoming littered with poorly designed and completely useless studies like this by authors whose ONLY impotent justification for the paucity of data is "a more thorough investigation is needed." Is there any reason THEY themselves could have not conducted a more rigorous study? Yep, there probably is and it's called intellectual laziness.

I see...Lake Mead is drying up, so therefore increased temperatures causes more fevers.

Larkin, It's my understanding that Lake Mead wasn't there before the Hoover Dam. Perhaps nature is just correcting man's meddling. Lake Mead has a long geologic history (millions and millions of years) of wet and dry. And it's thought that the Colorado River has dried up before over 700 years ago and will again. But it just seems right to ring the global warming alarm, doesn't it?

Paul, I wasn't trying to prove/disprove anything...I personally think all the global warming alarm is ridiculous, especially all of these "connections/proof" as of late--in other words I agree with you.

However, from your post I inferred you believed kids are more likely to get sick in cold weather as opposed to in the summer (due to weather conditions)...as I once believed, as well.

Great point P. Bunyan!

The lowest common denominator for all these kooks in the scientific community and the profiteers like Alagore is the amount of money they can pilfer out of it.

>This story about how the Colorado River is drying up won't be as easy to ridicule.

Oh how you underestimate me.

What's happening to Lake Mead and the Colorado River is just one symptom. Like the decrease in the ice caps, increasing temperatures, disappearing glaciers, etc.

It could be just a mere coincidence that all these things are occurring at the same time. I don't believe in coincidences however, and I feel that there is likely a correlation with the rapid increase in the burning of fossil fuels in the last few decades.

I'm not a climatologist and don't claim to be an expert on this stuff. It just seems like too many strange things happening at the same time.

Actually 914, I think Algore is more interested in power than money-- he's already got plenty of money.

But the leftist theologians, euphemistically referred to a "climatologists", do know that if the scare dies down or if the data refutes the current human induced global warming dogma their funding will dry up like Lake Mead during a drought.

They'd rather lie to us and play on our fears then see that happen.

So Larkin, of what are the thickening ice caps, growing glaciers, decreasing temperatures, and expanding rivers and lakes (which are also occuring at this time) symptomatic?

I'm not a climatologist and don't claim to be an expert on this stuff. It just seems like too many strange things happening at the same time.

People have been trying to explain and control the weather since time immemorial. We've had more than a century of this scaremongering - this is the SECOND global warming scare this century. After the last one (when none of these dire predictions came true) things settled down for a while and then we had the global cooling scare of the 70s. Which was the SECOND global cooling scare of the century.

It's all a load of crap. Face it, you're caught in the Matrix. It's time to look at history, and accept that you have been fooled.

Like the decrease in the ice caps

I think you mean ice cap. Considering that Antartica is not losing but gaining ice.

DaveD:

Is there any reason THEY themselves could have not conducted a more rigorous study? Yep, there probably is and it's called intellectual laziness.

Good points in your post, but I'll take a different tack than intellectual laziness. "Publish or Perish" exists in medicine as much as it does on the university campus. A study like this, and its subsequent pick up in the news media means the MD's can coast on this study for quite a while.

More important that intellectual laziness, a true study, one that would yield useful and verifiable data, would likely take a decade or longer to compile. It used to be that MD's, researchers and others took that time frame into account. They didn't have to worry about the media being so eager to pick up on a study (any study as this instance so ably demonstrates) that they could use to fill up time in the 24/7 news cycle. Add in the factor of bias towards anything that confirms the Global Warming/Climate Change phenomenon and you have, for those same MD's, an instant sensation.

Why spend a decade properly testing something out when you can cut to the chase?

Actually Larkin, you're right to a point, I see very little to ridicule in that article... It has nothing to do with global warming.

It lays out why the Colorado River is drying up....

A doubling of water demand in the area, and cyclical droughts that have been known to be occurring in the area for for the last 500 years. (long before the evil SUV)

It is quite easy however to ridicule you for being an absolute jackass suggesting it is proof of global warming. You're a dimwit.

The only factors they cite have nothing to do with this debate.

In fact them citing the fact there are cycles of drought in the area only serves to make the point that the earth is not static and we should not expect it to be.

If you had any ability to think critically, I would not have to explain this. Alas, you don't so I do.

larkin:

I'm not a climatologist and don't claim to be an expert on this stuff. It just seems like too many strange things happening at the same time.

Ever heard of "coincidence"?!

What's happening to Lake Mead and the Colorado River is just one symptom. Like the decrease in the ice caps, increasing temperatures, disappearing glaciers, etc.

Larkin, you didn't read the article did you? You read the headline, saw the photo and posted it. If you read the article you'd know it isn't even about global warming.

I'm not a climatologist and don't claim to be an expert on this stuff.

Whew, that's a relief.

You don't need to be a climatologist but the ability to read helps.

Hey, my water glass is half empty. Global warming!

Wait, is it half full?

I'm not a climatologist and don't claim to be an expert on this stuff.

Sadly, neither is Al Gore, but that doesn't stop people from thinking he is an expert. Unfortunately, it is his type of hysterical screeching that leads people such as yourself to look at that story you linked to and think man-made global warming is responsible.

lol I am so not surprised by this rubbish reporting. I live here in Australia and our media in all forms over the last few years has turned to total crap. They publish twisted and outlandish stories as "facts" and they were busted for it with another issue the other day.

Dont believe me? LOL read this!