Monday, January 27, 2025

 

Climate study: Rise in heat deaths will substantially outweigh fewer cold deaths




London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine




Climate change will likely result in a significant rise in deaths from heat across Europe, substantially surpassing any decrease in cold-related deaths. This trend persists across climate change scenarios and even under high adaptation to heat, reinforcing the need for aggressive mitigation policies.

A modelling study, led by researchers from the Environment & Health Modelling (EHM) Lab at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and published in Nature Medicine, estimates that changes to the climate could directly result in over 2.3 million additional temperature-related deaths in 854 European cities by 2099 if urgent action is not taken to cut carbon emissions. However, up to 70% of these deaths could be prevented if rapid action is taken.

The study suggests that even if enormous efforts were made to adapt cities to changing temperatures this would not be enough to balance increased health risks due to exposure to heat, especially in the most vulnerable areas such as the Mediterranean region, Central Europe, and the Balkans. Only swift cuts to carbon emissions that keep temperatures down were shown to reduce the number of extreme heat deaths.

Dr Pierre Masselot, lead author at the EHM-Lab at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), said: “Our results stress the urgent need to aggressively pursue both climate change mitigation and adaptation to increased heat. This is especially critical in the Mediterranean area where, if nothing is done, consequences could be dire. But, by following a more sustainable pathway, we could avoid millions of deaths before the end of the century.”

According to the modelling study, the ten European cities projected to see the highest temperature-related death tolls by the end of the century are:

Barcelona (Spain) 246,082

Rome (Italy) 147,738

Naples (Italy) 147,248

Madrid (Spain) 129,716

Milan (Italy) 110,131

Athens (Greece) 87,523

Valencia (Spain) 67,519

Marseille (France) 51,306

Bucharest (Romania) 47,468

Genoa (Italy) 36,338

[NOTE: Numbers above represent projected cumulative increase in temperature-related deaths by 2099 due to climate change]

Due to their larger populations the highest numbers of temperature-related deaths are projected in the most populous Mediterranean cities, but many smaller cities in Malta, Spain and Italy are also likely to be badly affected with high temperature-related death rates.

Away from the Mediterranean region, impacts are expected to be less severe, with other European capitals such as Paris (13,515) projected to see a smaller, but still significant, increase in cumulative cold and heat deaths. On the other hand, most cities in the British Isles and Scandinavian countries could see a net decrease in deaths, one being London (-27,455). This lower death toll would however be massively outweighed by the increases in the rest of Europe, resulting in 2.3 million additional deaths across the whole of Europe.

Professor Antonio Gasparrini, senior author of the article and lead of the EHM-Lab at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), said: “This study provides compelling evidence that the steep rise in heat-related deaths will far exceed any drop related to cold, resulting in a net increase in mortality across Europe. These results debunk proposed theories of ‘beneficial’ effects of climate change, often proposed in opposition to vital mitigation policies that should be implemented as soon as possible.”

This research uses risk functions of temperature in all cities, accounting for local and age-specific adaptation and acclimatisation. These are combined with projections of temperatures, population, and death rates to estimate expected temperature-related death tolls that can be attributed specifically to changing temperatures. The researchers considered a range of climate and epidemiological simulations to assess the uncertainty associated with the estimates, under scenarios defined for the IPCC sixth assessment report. The researchers additionally computed death tolls for scenarios in which the risk of mortality related to heat is reduced.

Adaptation scenarios devised in this research inform on the degree of risk reduction needed but remain abstract and do not inform on specific action to be taken. Additionally, this research focuses on daily mean temperature and does not account for specific weather events that could modify the estimated death toll such as extreme nighttime temperatures and humidity conditions.

 

AMERIKA

Firearm-related hospitalizations had dropped before the pandemic, then shot up, study finds




Rise was fastest for Black patients, children, and people covered by Medicaid



Michigan Medicine - University of Michigan




Firearm injuries that sent victims to the hospital had gone down steadily over the five years before the COVID-19 pandemic began, but reversed course sharply over the next two years, a new University of Michigan study finds.

In all, 34% more people were hospitalized for a firearm-related injury in 2020 and 2021 than would have been predicted based on pre-pandemic trends.

The gap between expected and actual hospitalizations was even bigger for patients under the age of 18, those covered by Medicaid insurance for people with low incomes or disabilities, and those who are Black. The study is published in JAMA Network Open.

These groups had firearm hospitalization rates 44%, 46% and 41% higher, respectively, than they would have if pre-pandemic trends had continued.

And while the researchers cannot directly link the rise in firearm hospitalizations to the increase in firearm sales during the first two years of the pandemic, they show a significant association between trends in such sales and trends in firearm-related hospital stays – all the way from the end of 2015 to the end of 2021.

“Taken together, our findings raise new concerns about the sustained increase in firearm-related injury, and in particular the disproportionate increase in younger, low-income and Black individuals,” said Raymond Jean, M.D., M.H.S., the lead author of the new study and a trauma surgeon at Michigan Medicine, U-M’s academic medical center. 

Jean and colleagues used the most recent national hospitalization data available from the federal Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project to create a computer model of the 2015-2019 trends that allowed them to predict expected firearm hospitalizations for 2020 and 2021.

They then compared those forecasts to what actually happened, revealing the 34% overall increase and the larger increases in some groups. Two major groups had increases smaller than the average: those over age 55 and those insured by Medicare. But even these groups had increases in firearm hospitalization.

While there are peaks and valleys in firearm hospitalizations and firearm sales every year, both the peaks and valleys for both measures dropped steadily from 2015 to 2019. But by the summer of 2020, firearm hospitalizations had shot up to higher than the highest peak of the previous five years. This lagged the rapid rise in firearm sales during the first months of 2020.

Jean notes that the data source the researchers used does not include data on people who died from a firearm injury before reaching a hospital, or were treated at an emergency department without being admitted to the hospital for at least one night. It also doesn’t include those who didn’t seek care.

The researchers also can’t tell the exact location where each person was hospitalized, or who fired the firearm that caused the injury. So, they can’t look at the impacts of state-level firearm law changes, COVID-related policies or violence related to social unrest.

Even so, Jean hopes the findings could help spur further research using other data sources, and inform policy efforts to reduce firearm-related injuries and deaths, including suicides, interpersonal violence and accidents.

“I have seen firsthand what bullets can do to the human body, and worked to save the lives of those who have survived long enough to reach the operating room,” said Jean, who is an assistant professor in the U-M Medical School’s Department of Surgery, in the division of Acute Care Surgery. “That drives my interest in understanding the scope of this issue, and trends over time, through advanced data tools.”

In addition to Jean, the study’s authors are fellow U-M Surgery faculty members Andrew Ibrahim, M.D., M.Sc., Mark Hemmila, M.D., and Staci Aubry, M.D.; statistician Aayushi Sinha, M.S., U-M medical student Sarah Diaz, B.S.N., and Katerina Jou, M.D., a surgical resident at North Shore University Hospital.

Ibrahim is an editor at JAMA Network Open but was not involved in decisions about the paper’s review or acceptance.

The study was funded by the Association for Academic Surgery Foundation.

 

Reference: Firearm-Related Injury Hospital Admissions During the COVID-19 Pandemic, JAMA Network Opendoi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.56234

 

From Fox News to MSNBC: Diverse media diet linked to higher trust in vaccines



A survey of 1,700 people found that those who consumed more conservative news were less likely to be vaccinated, trust science



University of Colorado at Boulder




People who get their news from an ideologically diverse array of sources are more likely to get vaccinated, regardless of their political affiliation, new University of Colorado Boulder research shows.

“This study shows that being exposed to a range of perspectives encourages critical thinking and makes people less likely to get stuck in a bubble or misled by misinformation,” said senior author Leaf Van Boven, a professor in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience.

Published in the journal Scientific Reports, the study is among the first to take a close look at how media consumption habits shape vaccine hesitancy, which the  World Health Organization has named as one of the “top 10” global threats to public health. The study comes as vaccination rates are declining nationwide, and public trust in scientists remains lower than it was before the pandemic. President Donald Trump has also nominated outspoken vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.

The researchers offer some advice for public health communicators wanting to boost trust and improve vaccine adherence: Encourage people to get out of their echo chambers.

“We as a society have kind of fallen into this belief that you can’t change other people’s minds, but this paper goes to show that when people are introduced to new ideas and evidence, they can make more informed choices and they are willing to change their beliefs,” said Dani Grant, first author of the study and a doctoral candidate at CU Boulder.

Media diet

As part of a larger project exploring public sentiments about COVID-19, Van Boven and Grant surveyed nearly 1,700 people in the spring of 2022, when vaccines and boosters were readily available to the public. The researchers asked respondents their age, ethnicity, education and political affiliation—factors that have previously been shown to shape vaccine adherence—and also asked them to rank how much they got their news from 20 different news outlets.

Outlets ranged from Breitbart News Network and Fox News on the conservative side to MSNBC and Democracy Now on the liberal side. The researchers determined a publication’s ideological tilt using bias ratings from All Sides and Ad Fontes Media, independent media intelligence organizations.

The team gave each respondent a media diversity score based on their answers.

At the time, 21% of those surveyed were not vaccinated, 17% were vaccinated, and 62% were vaccinated and boosted.

The study found that people who reported consuming more conservative media were significantly less likely to be vaccinated and boosted. The researchers noted that, for example, Fox News pundit Sean Hannity told viewers at the time that COVID-19 was made up by the “deep state,” and then-Fox business anchor Trish Regan characterized the virus as “a scam.”

Echo chambers

The most interesting finding, Grant and Van Boven said, was that when people consumed a diverse media diet, even if it included a range of conservative outlets, they still tended to get vaccinated.

“People who consumed news and opinions from a variety of political perspectives were more likely to be vaccinated, even after accounting for their political affiliation, age, gender, race and education,” said Van Boven.

When it came to trust in science, media consumption also had a notable influence. Those who consumed only left-leaning media had very high trust in science, while those who consumed only right-leaning media were highly skeptical.

The authors said that understanding the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy is critical not only for addressing the ongoing threat of COVID-19  but also for tackling other diseases like influenza, measles and whooping cough. Vaccination rates for all three diseases are declining in the United States.

“When people delay or refuse vaccines, we see avoidable deaths, illness and economic losses,” said Van Boven. “Vaccines are among our most effective public health tools, but their power depends on public trust.”

To regain trust, scientists and public health officials might also do well to step out of their own echo chambers, Grant said, sharing their perspectives and research with outlets they may not typically engage with.

“This is an opportunity for scientists to reflect on where we are not being as constructive as we could be,” she said. “I think that we should all be interacting across the media spectrum.” 

WAIT, WHAT?!

Floating solar increases greenhouse gas emissions on small ponds



Cornell University




ITHACA, N.Y. – While floating solar – the emerging practice of putting solar panels on bodies of water – is promising in its efficiency and its potential to spare agricultural and conservation lands, a new experiment finds environmental trade-offs.

In the first manipulative field study examining the environmental impacts of floating solar, published in Environmental Science and Technology, researchers found that floating solar panels increased greenhouse gas emissions on small ponds by nearly 27%.

“There have been a flurry of papers about floating solar, but it’s mostly modeling and projections,” said Steven Grodsky, assistant professor of natural resources and the environment. “This is the first manipulative study to produce empirical results. It’s saying, here’s what’s actually happening. And what we found was that there was increased greenhouse gas emissions from ponds with floating solar.”

Grodsky and collaborators covered three ponds at the Cornell Experimental Pond Facility with solar panels, at 70% coverage, and found that, almost immediately, methane and carbon dioxide emissions increased – by 26.8% compared to ponds without solar panels – and dissolved oxygen throughout the ponds substantially decreased.

“If you put floating solar on there,” Grodsky said, “you’re drastically reducing oxygen availability for organisms, you’re messing with ecological processes, how decomposition takes place, the microbes, the way wind moves across the surface of the water. It’s all connected.”

The data is particularly important because much of the floating solar development in the U.S. is currently happening on small lakes and ponds, Grodsky said. It’s also timely for New York state, where floating solar could be considered as an alternative to terrestrial solar and is the source of debate and exploration.

The study offers some bright sides for floating solar: When comparing floating solar to terrestrial solar in total emissions cost, from site development to maintenance and disposal, the floating solar’s greenhouse gas emissions (per kilowatt hour of energy generated) are likely still lower than terrestrial solar and fossil fuel-based energy production. Seventy percent coverage also represents an outer limit, and the researchers made suggestions that might offset the panels’ impacts, like reducing coverage or installing a bubbler to agitate the water, although more research is needed.

“If you look at the history of energy transitions – from wood to fossil fuels, for example – everything was based on energy production, and the environment wasn’t taken into consideration, and now we have environmental injustice, we have climate change,” Grodsky said. “The idea here is to nip that in the bud and re-envision the way we approach this energy transition.”

For additional information, see this Cornell Chronicle story.

-30-