And whenever you have a chart of historical data like this, you have to at least consider that an increase could be reflective of either improved diagnostic or record-keeping abilities.
dmmeyournudes 24 points 3 years ago
If we stop testing we will have 0 cases!
Dozzi92 12 points 3 years ago
More like you just died from old in 1970, versus acute heat stroke in 2023.
I say this being fully on board with the climate change. Charts like this serve little purpose when you don't properly adjust for the myriad changes that have occured over the last half century. And before anyone says "you mean like global warming," no, don't account for that one, because that's what we're trying to see.
DrNeurohax 4 points 3 years ago
Yeah, it can be as simple as the death certificates requiring only a primary cause of death.
Old man collapses from a heart attack while trying to change a tire on a hot desert road? Cause of death: heart attack. If more details are requested, they could probably get away with just claiming age-related health issues. The guy is dead, no foul play, the case is closed.
TheLowestStone 7 points 3 years ago
Finally, someone gets it. We just need to ban thermometers.
DrNeurohax 2 points 3 years ago
The libs are making us slaves to those damn thermomasters! They better not take away my freedom to boil off those 3 remaining brain cells!
DrNeurohax 1 point 3 years ago
Very much this, and especially over this period. More universal diagnostics, more emphasis on secondary causes and contributors, etc.
And it works the other way, too. Fewer people should die per capita based on faster EMS response times, better medicine, more urban living, etc.
The big one for me is age. I never really heard of people retiring to Arizona until the late 90s. It was always Florida before then. The over 50 crowd is 36% now vs 23% in 1970.
oo1 19 points 3 years ago
yeah, people lose so much credibility when they don't even control for simple easy things.
there will always be some confounding factors, but doing rate per population, is rarely hard - andneeded over decade comparisons.
demographic risk adjustment is more complex, so i'd not expect that. but if it is at least acknowledged, then the article is more credible and will get more (of my) attention.
media (and i guess their audience) seem to enjoy hype though . . .
oh shit this is the f.t. i used to think they were among the more credible journo's. pity.
tryptaminev 1 point 3 years ago
Then lets ask the other way round:
Shouldn't we be doing more about increasing heat related deaths, even if it would be primarily caused by more people becoming vulnerable to it, or more people living in the zone that is dangerous?
DrNeurohax 0 points 3 years ago
I agree. And shit like this makes me trust financial reporting in general. It's akin to not accounting for inflation in financial graphs.
And yes, the risk adjustment can be as complex as they want to make it, but when I clicked, I was expecting a study of some type. Probably my bias kicking in. My first thought was, "Are they kidding?" Then I saw it was from a news source and thought, "Oh, okay... no wait. Still, they know this is bad, right?"
Still gets those nummy clicks, I guess.
saltesc 15 points 3 years ago
As an analyst, this pissed me off. There's like an oath to never fudge, misrepresent, or be selective with data to manipulate the viewer. We collect raw data for the purest source of fact. It is a single source of truth.
Just a quick Google on one of the glaringly obvious misrepresentations in this graph, and AZ's population in 1970 was 1.77M; it is now 7.36M. Displaying this graph more truthfully would still highlight increased temperatures impacting increased rate of death to heat, but not at all dramatically, so the creator has misrepresented. Then there's a lot more to factor in for proper analysis. Healthcare rate with growth? Infrastructure for the same? Why just Arizona?
Climate change science has fact and figure on its side. There is not need to misrepresent it like deniers do. Doing so dilutes and damages the cause by denying the one thing it has, truth.
DrNeurohax 4 points 3 years ago
Exactly. I stumbled across this report from the AZ Dept of Health which breaks it down into per 100k people and the data still supports the author's point. The report then goes on to divide up the population by age, residents vs visitors, county, etc.
Hell, the FT author could have just included a plot of the population growth, which was pretty linear. Not great, but better than nothing.
Grinds my gears.
banditoitaliano 6 points 3 years ago
Hmm, but a big part of the problem here is that vulnerable places like Arizona are also those seeing such high population growth. I’m not sure correcting for that would make the graph “better”, it would just show something different.
DrNeurohax 5 points 3 years ago
I'm not advocating for better or worse. In the end, the data shows what it shows. I'm just saying that there was essentially no "analysis", making any interpretation inappropriate.
Hey, more people should survive, thanks to newer medical treatments and more concentration of populations around cities.
On the flip side, there's a larger portion of the population that's older and from out of state.
In between there's the chance that the threat of heat-related health problems should be much diminished due to widespread access to air conditioning. But, that also means more people haven't had first hand experience with heat exhaustion/stroke, and don't realize how quickly things can go from kinda bad to dead.
DakkaDok 5 points 3 years ago
Here's a version scaled by population (deaths per 100,000 residents). I'm no expert in this kind of thing, so I didn't account for other factors, such as age groups. Also, the data I found using the source in the original graph only went up to 2021, and didn't include 2017 for some reason.
DrNeurohax 3 points 3 years ago
Yeah, that looks more reasonable. The original graph makes it look like there have been ~5x the number of deaths in the last few years compared to ~10 years ago. Adjusted for population growth, it's ~2-3x.
That's still really concerning and makes the point the article was making, while being much more accurate and defensible when scrutinized. Thanks for that!
IntrepidIceIgloo 3 points 3 years ago
rates. I’m pretty sure a couple happened in just the last few weeks.
I've heard of articles saying that global warming is already leading to more air turbulence and that it is only going to get much stronger by the mid century
DrNeurohax 5 points 3 years ago
Yes. Hot air is thinner, so there's less lift on aircraft wings. There's actually a conversion they're supposed to use that basically says, 'At this temp, treat the plane as if it's actually at this other, much higher, altitude."
Here's one of the recent videos I've seen mentioning it (around 5 min in they mention the "density altitude"). I'm not a pilot and just find the stuff interesting.
shandrakor 1 point 3 years ago
That was super informative, thank you.
gAlienLifeform 57 points 3 years ago
Love the energy, but before posting anything on the internet you should imagine a prosecutor asking you to read it to a jury
whoisearth 30 points 3 years ago
I'm stealing this. I'm seriously worried for the world. We are entering a new age of the diggers and levellers and that ended with the beheading of the king and no real change.
We have a segment of the population that's exceedingly frothing at the mouth and in some cases for very valid reasons but at the same time they have no plan and that's scary. They want to scorch the earth instead of fix it.
gAlienLifeform 17 points 3 years ago
I'm stealing this.
Please do!
I'm seriously worried for the world.
Same :(
We are entering a new age of the diggers and levellers and that ended with the beheading of the king and no real change.
First of all, great reference, the English civil war is a fascinating period of history.
But second of all, it wasn't the diggers who chopped off Charles' head, they basically never had any real influence on anyone. It was the nobility in parliament that did that (and honestly, Charles did it to himself by being such a stubborn pain in the ass for the nobility), and they were the same ones who didn't have a plan/couldn't really imagine a world without a king, which is why they basically forced Cromwell to be king in all but name and then crowned Charles' son when Cromwell died.
They want to scorch the earth instead of fix it.
I can imagine a lot of scenarios where a bit of scorching is a necessary first step in fixing (but I can also imagine a lot of scenarios where scorching goes off the rails and/or starts cycles of vengeance, so, yeah, we're seriously worried for the world and for good reason).
whoisearth 8 points 3 years ago
Another amateur history buff?!
I wasn't implying the diggers chopped off Charles' head. I was more hinting at he political turmoil at the time was very similar to what we see now and it scares me. Those who don't pay attention to history are doomed to repeat it and we are collectively horrible at teaching people history!
VentraSqwal 7 points 3 years ago
I would say the richest and most evil of us dooming our planet to a heated, hell hole of an apocalypse kind of deserves some emotional reaction. The lack of one by most of the population is probably why we won't see change until it's too late.
masterofn001 7 points 3 years ago
It already is too late.
The only thing we have left is to make sure the ones whi caused this suffer as immeasurably possible as the damage they've done. To make sure they do not enjoy one second of the remainder of their days.
This includes any and all o&g execs. Every last shareholder. Every politician who has done nothing or invited this. Every one of them.
Heads on sticks.
masterofn001 12 points 3 years ago
Yes, judge, i said " we should just shoot the people who are actively killing us."
What's the problem here? It's stand your ground / self defense at its finest.
jackoneill 6 points 3 years ago
100% tax on anything past 100 million or 100% of their head gets lopped off. That's still an absurd amount of money for you and your family. Put the rest into growing your businesses and thus the economy, or give it to Uncle Sam for some socialized healthcare and UBI instead.
PickTheStick 6 points 3 years ago
Put the rest into growing your businesses
That's what they currently do. All of them. That's the whole point in them owning/investing in a business. That's how they sidestep so many taxes. Aside from a few (relatively) toys and houses, do you really think Musk or Bezos keep billions on hand in liquid form or physically owned objects?
I have a friend with parents that owned their own business that wasn't really all that large. It had a net profit of maybe $450,000 per year. They paid themselves enough to do whatever they wanted to that year, and the company "reinvests" the rest. It's all a shell game to avoid taxes. They did it by buying real estate for the company to 'eventually' grow on, but just put five cows on and got themselves agricultural exemptions on taxes, then sold the land later. Repeat x100. That money from the sale could be shuffled into other 'company' assets. That's super small time. They didn't have fancy lawyers or investing agents to help.
Big, rich, asshole business does it by buying back stock, diversifying (do you really think the big contractor company wants to own a grocery store chain, or a bank wants to own restaurants?) into assets that can just be sold later to recoup the money, etc.
Owning a business is all about tax avoidance. An individual doesn't have many ways to pump up deductions on taxes, but businesses have so many different avenues that even the IRS throws up their hands at some point. Requiring an individual to "put the rest into" their business won't change anything, and god knows the economy improving is only going to help a small portion of society. That portion isn't the portion that needs help.
Also, truthfully, I'd lower your number to $10,000,000. It's enough to live on even in the ritziest of areas, in the fanciest of houses that aren't mansions, and is still more per year than the highest of the middle-class will earn in their lives.
mindbleach 34 points 3 years ago
Between literal apocalyptic scenarios and open fascism, it's hard not to picture the trolley problem. But we're forced to pretend everyone's acting in good faith. Like if we just try harder, words will work, all of a sudden.
At some point we're telling people not to "escalate" to violence against people shoving them onto the train. The shovers aren't the ones killing them... directly. They're just public servants, doing their job! So relax, get along, kumbayah, and get in the fuckin' train.
For some queer Americans that's not an exaggerated comparison. The actual Nazis also targeted trans people, almost immediately. Decades of records on transition and therapeutic treatments were burned, by doctors, to protect those individuals from murderous bigots. Nowadays it wouldn't even work because that's all digital. And the elected bastards talking about accessing teen girls' period apps to detect pregnancy are the exact same bastards talking about globe-spanning temperature data like detecting a trend is impossible.
wazoobonkerbrain 7 points 3 years ago
I think I agree with you on all those points but that was one rollercoaster of a post.
mindbleach 4 points 3 years ago
Exciting times will do that.
mindbleach 10 points 3 years ago path: 0 1589662 1604524 1617862 1618824, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 0
ShakyPerception 21 points 3 years ago
But… but without those heroic political figures, how will mega-corporations be allowed to continue maximizing profits.
This type of shortsighted ignorance is what causes drops economic growth and allows communism to win.
…. I’m being told that it’s now trans people, not communists that are the real threat.
…. No, no wait it’s still communists. So both I guess?
/s
PlantbasedChe 15 points 3 years ago
I am glad we have lemmy. In Reddit you could have been banned even acting on a based self defense
Bagofbuttholes 14 points 3 years ago
On reddit I was banned for suggesting it would be better to force change now than wait until things are even worse.
Prandom_returns 22 points 3 years ago
Just shoot at it with all the guns.
PlantbasedChe 10 points 3 years ago
And keep eating meat. "Good karma"
Vegoon 5 points 3 years ago
path: 0 1600433 1604619 1604832 1631683, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 4
To have any hope of meeting the central goal of the Paris Agreement, which is to limit global warming to 2°C or less, our carbon emissions must be reduced considerably, including those coming from agriculture. Clark et al. show that even if fossil fuel emissions were eliminated immediately, emissions from the global food system alone would make it impossible to limit warming to 1.5°C and difficult even to realize the 2°C target. Thus, major changes in how food is produced are needed if we want to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.
RobBanks 0 points 3 years ago
estation, which release carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O); production and use of fertilizers and other agrichemicals, which emit CO2, N2O, and methane (CH4); enteric fermentation during the production of ruminants (cows, sheep, and goats), which emits CH4; production of rice in paddies, which emits CH4; livestock manure, which emits N2O and CH4; and combustion of fossil fuels in food production and supply chains, which emits CO2. In total, global food system emissions averaged ~16 billion tonnes (Gt) CO2 equivalents year−1 from 2012 to 2017 (4).
Seems like going vegan wouldn't help. Yours still have deforestation, fertilizer, rice paddies, and fossil fuels in production.
Piecemakers3Dprints 2 points 3 years ago
B-b-b-but what about the bitcoins? Hurdur.
LetMeEatCake 57 points 3 years ago
Every time I see crazy heat data for Arizona and other places like it in the US, it makes me wonder. When the fuck will we see a reversion of population trends of people moving south? Arizona, Texas, etc. are only going to get worse. Everywhere is going to get worse, but there's a lot of rapidly growing areas that are on track to be non-viable for 1/3+ of the year within 10-20 years.
People should not be moving to Arizona, not with climate change as it is.
Catoblepas 14 points 3 years ago
I live in the southwest and it’s definitely something I worry about. Every year it gets worse in our apartment during the summer. Our cooling bill is ridiculous for ~1/3rd of the year. The amount of heat transfer coming in through our single pane windows is insane. The walls barely seem insulated at all. On most hot days (95F/36C+) with the A/C blasting we can’t get it below 80F/26C inside.
Laws where I live require only minimum temperatures that must be met by residences, not maximums; almost nobody is freezing to death here (very rarely someone unhoused will), but people ARE dying of heat related illnesses. It makes me so angry, not only because it’s miserable to be hot all day and expensive to run the A/C as hard as we do, but because it’s so wasteful. The amount of electricity we have to use because our landlord is some bean counting, soulless corporation is sickening.
skillissuer 7 points 3 years ago path: 0 1587722 1590988 1601173, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 4
WhipperSnapper 5 points 3 years ago
Also, the lizard people won't steal your thoughts, so that's a bonus!
Catoblepas 1 point 3 years ago
I’ve invested in heat reducing window film and it’s still this bad! 😔
skillissuer 1 point 3 years ago path: 0 1587722 1590988 1601173 1604387 1604821, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1
afraid_of_zombies 5 points 3 years ago
Texas would be fine. They got the engineering talent and energy to get around it. Which they won't because it's Texas.
FlyingSquid 5 points 3 years ago
I don't know that the northern U.S. will be that great either in the summer. I'm in Indiana and it's been in the 90s for weeks. When I was a kid, it was a day here or there in the 90s.
HunterBidensLapDog 56 points 3 years ago
If only we had some kind of warning?!? If only there was something we could do about it?!?
voidMainVoid 22 points 3 years ago
I did both thoughts and prayers.
Jeanschyso 9 points 3 years ago
You forgot the Thoughts!!
doctorplasmatron 3 points 3 years ago
dr. david suzuki pours himself another scotch and sighs.
Arthur_Leywin 49 points 3 years ago
Surely we can just pray for it to go away.
speaker_hat 4 points 3 years ago
God's will
LearysFlyingSaucer 2 points 3 years ago
A few years of never going outside before the power infrastructure finally overloads and no more air conditioning.
talldangry 1 point 3 years ago
Letting the days go by!
Let the water all dry up
Letting the days go by!
Water flowing underground?!
Into the alfalfa, until the money's gone
Once in a lifetime! Lake Mead's looking more like ground.
DrNeurohax 32 points 3 years ago
Just thought I'd add this report from the AZ health department. This breaks down the factors MUCH better and comes to a similar, but not quite as extreme, conclusion. Only part is normalized for population, but it gives an idea of how to scale the numbers.
Sterile_Technique 26 points 3 years ago path: 0 1619035, hotness: undefined, score: 26, children: 4
Tb0n3 12 points 3 years ago
That has a different connotation. You might want to look where it came from.
pinkdrunkenelephants 7 points 3 years ago
Nah, fuck them both. Put the oil execs outside in the heat and let them roast.
Sizably8826 23 points 3 years ago
We can thank the boomers for that
Misconduct 5 points 3 years ago
I mean... They did do stuff like fix the ozone layer. Unlike us, they have the excuse of information being considerably harder to come by because they didn't really have the internet. So far, for the most part, all we're doing collectively is being mad about it online. Oh, yeah I guess we banned straws.
Millennials have been adults for a while now and... Welp. I don't think it'll be long before the newer gens start heavy criticizing us and frankly we'll deserve it. If we were any less apathetic than previous gens things would have already changed or be changing faster imo.
FoxAndKitten 9 points 3 years ago
On one hand yeah, I'd look at us pretty dimly from the outside
On the other, we've been kinda fucked. Our mental health is in the gutter, we're unable to make connections the way every other generation could, we're missing all these milestones like buying a house and having kids and older generations keep telling us it's our fault.
Even as far as voting, we've been fucked. Previous generations had a choice - we get an ultimatum
They just keep gaslighting us.
We don't have the money, we don't have the power, but we do have the numbers and as a group we're not ok... Frankly, there's no way this ends well. It's hard to comprehend how the powers that be haven't realized that and thrown us a bone now and again
Fedizen 22 points 3 years ago
Climate change is just getting started and people should start suing cities and design firms for failing to include shade requirements in their standards and for making roads too wide to properly shade
Where natural shade can't be sustained artificial shade needs to be provided.
The single family house on a grass lawn is such a stupid idea in many places
LearysFlyingSaucer 7 points 3 years ago
I wish, but I just know the segregationist city planners in my town will just lay down more asphalt and gated suburbs. We don't even have sidewalks or crosswalks even though there's people walking/biking everywhere. They intentionally make our towns unlivable.
AngryBear 21 points 3 years ago
Ironically the oil companies back in the 60’s, did an extensive research into what exactly would happen to the climate and ecology etc, if they kept drilling for and using fossil fuel etc. It’s so accurate that even todays models aren’t that good (I find that fact odd), but bottomline, they knew.. they knew, but kept on doing it anyway.
SeaJ 9 points 3 years ago
They are likely referring to Exxon's research. I think they started research in the 70s which spread the earth would warm with an increase in CO2. They did quite a few studies (that they kept internal) and a good chunk of them were as good of not better than NASA's climate models. They are not as good as our current models though. But considering they have denied CO2 linked climate change despite their own research showing it for the past 60+ years, they can go fuck themselves.
AngryBear 5 points 3 years ago
path: 0 1638792 1644154 1657272, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 1
A Dutch site, but with a bit of translation applied it should be perfectly readable from Dutch to English. Also you are not bombarded with ads unlike the original the guardian link, they link to that article and so it’s available if preferred.
Old_Fat_White_Guy 19 points 3 years ago
NGL... First glance at the chart I thought the left hand scale was temperature with a sudden spike to 250°.... no wonder people are dying when your iced tea boils in your glass as you try to drink it!
pinkdrunkenelephants 18 points 3 years ago
They're just going to let the homeless die in the streets, aren't they? 😑
doctorplasmatron 2 points 3 years ago
i think you forgot the "/s"
darkmatter 43 points 3 years ago
Sir, this is a screenshot
michel 4 points 3 years ago
Here you are:
Courtesy of this Mastodon toot
LambdaDuck 4 points 3 years ago
the screenshot says “Financial Times” at the bottom left and “Source: FT analysis of CDC WONDER” in the bottom right
Skunk 12 points 3 years ago
And regulations for less pavement, concrete etc and more green and trees to provide shade and cooler temperatures.
You can live in extreme temperatures, provided the infrastructures are built for that (ie. Ouarzazate in Morocco).
But with the US urban planning and all for cars policy it won’t happen before it’s too late.
STRIKINGdebate2 10 points 3 years ago
Trees and green in the US southwest a pipedream tbh. The only way that could possibly be achieved is by siphoning off a ridiculous amount of water from another location. Call it as it is. The US Southwest isn't built to sustain human life.
WhipperSnapper 8 points 3 years ago
"Pheonix is a monument to man's arrogance", as King of the Hill said.
It's one of those places I think about sometimes, wondering "do people really need to live everywhere"?
Malfeasant 2 points 3 years ago
There has been talk of diverting water from the Mississippi river (or was it the Missouri?) and somehow transporting it across the continental divide to the southwest. Terrible idea, I might be worried if it wasn't so far outside the realm of possibility.
Ni 3 points 3 years ago
There was an interesting study done on a city hear me which said that the lack of trees and general built design of the area had made the city's temp go up by between 2-5C. Which is a big difference!
afraid_of_zombies 3 points 3 years ago
I am starting Guerrilla gardening club. You are welcome to join. No membership dues, no pledging, just starting planting
gAlienLifeform 3 points 3 years ago
And regulations to provide for the humane resettlement of climate refugees
ButtonMcLemming 2 points 3 years ago
In my opinion, the only solution, although radical, would be to make motorists’ lives a living hell (charging for road or parking lot use, lowering speed limits to increasingly slow levels, removing on-street parking lots, prioritizing bicyles and buses, reducing bus fare prices, and converting excess parking lots to new neighborhoods) that public transport (i.e. metro and local commuter trains) and bicycle paths can be considered to reduce road traffic with the budget allocated to making new roads or maintaining currently existing ones allocated to improving the public transport system and even providing a bicycle route network that can allow us to follow in the Netherlands’ footsteps.
Mediocre_Bard 10 points 3 years ago
No, there is a definite decomposition process that will see some heavy emissions.
Goodie 4 points 3 years ago
Fortunately no. (Maybe fortunately).
The last IPCC climate change report predicted that shits gonna get real fucking bad for a while, but at the rate we're going it should at least turn around sometime between 80 to 100 years.
there1snospoon 3 points 3 years ago
Is there feasibly anything we can do to shorten that time? Even if it’s on a catastrophic/behemoth level of change/effort? Or is this just how it is?
MystikIncarnate 12 points 3 years ago
I just want to say that graphs like this should be contrasted with the number of deaths from extreme cold. I know Arizona probably doesn't have the numbers of say, Alaska, but it's worthy of note to contrast the two.
I'd also point out that it is far easier for an individual to protect themselves against the rigors of cold than it is for heat; in the cold, with warm clothing, you can keep yourself warm, while the environment is very cold; fire is relatively easy to make, even if you have little more than sticks, and thus getting warm or keeping yourself warm is by and large easier to accomplish than staying cold.
When you're in an extremely hot environment, it's not like you can make yourself more naked than naked. You need some outside influence to keep you cool, like a swamp cooler, a misting sprayer, a cool body of water (like a river or lake), or some kind of man-made cooling device like an Air Conditioner, in a relatively sealed enclosure (which relies on consistent access to power to run it). most of these are either inaccessible to people in a city or built-up area; sure, there are fixtures, like fountains that contain water, usually not enough to keep them from heating up, and usually the water is recycled, so the heat stays with the water. all other water access is typically restricted to water lines, which usually someone is paying for, and nobody wants to pay to keep random people cool when they don't have to. All man-made (air conditioner) type cooling is generally access restricted to either workplaces, homes, or businesses/storefronts, where the expectation is that you'll be spending money there (which not everyone has).
I'm just saying, that the limiting factor to reducing death by extreme heat, is a far larger one, than death by extreme cold, where you should only need to hand out sweaters, gloves/mittens, jackets, blankets, etc, to keep people from dying from it. There's far-end extreme cold that almost nothing will save you from short of a heated structure, but generally, places that are inhabited by people who don't have access to safe heat and cooling (like a home), are more temperate than that extreme of cold.... not exactly too many homeless people walking around the arctic or Antarctic circles....
Neither is good, but both seem inevitable; regardless we should be doing all we can to help to ensure the survival of everyone, as a species. Whether that's saving them from the heat, the cold, from starvation or dehydration, we should be helping in any way we are able to.
d4rknusw1ld 9 points 3 years ago
Hydrate!
wazoobonkerbrain 37 points 3 years ago
Once the wet bulb temperature gets too high then conditions become lethal no matter how much you drink. This is happening more often.
d4rknusw1ld 18 points 3 years ago
Yeah I know. Can’t regulate sweating at that point and the body will start to frog boil. Hydrate was just a term drill sergeants would tell us when it was hot as hell. Someone military probably understood the reference.
wanderingmagus 1 point 3 years ago
I did, I understood the reference! Hooyah PT!
milkjug 2 points 3 years ago
Kids nowadays are so fragile with your participation trophies and dying from touching the ground. In my day, we pull up our bootstraps and head for the coal mines, then lie down on asphalt to nap like Real Men™ do.
/s if it isn't blatantly obvious.
chairman 1 point 3 years ago
IMHO the graph is not misleading. It is telling the story that more people are dying due to heat related issues. But yes, you may be right, that the older population contributes to this more but this does not mislead in any way that more people of dying to due heat related issues..
Liv2themax 1 point 3 years ago
Nature solving the core problem: overpopulation.
Jeanschyso 7 points 3 years ago
I don't think overpopulation is what's causing the issue here
brygphilomena 28 points 3 years ago
That's not fair. The medics want to help.
It's the healthcare admins and companies that just want the money. Don't blame the employees for the failures of the corporations and politicians.
PickTheStick 1 point 3 years ago
I doubt medics really want to bankrupt anyone. They're usually the lowest paid out of any emergency service. Police and fire departments are paid way higher.
My area: ~$56k - Average police starting salary
~$59k - Average fire starting salary
~$32k - Average basic EMT
~$34k - Average advanced EMT
~$39k - Average paramedic
Blame the big pharmaceutical companies and corporate takeover of hospitals and small clinics for the insanity of medical costs. The absolute shitshow that insurance has become is also a large contributor. It's bad enough that doctors are finding it much simpler to work for corporations instead of owning their own practice because it's easier for the big company to fight the other big company.
BilboBargains -2 points 3 years ago
Cause of death heatstroke with diabeetus and obesity.
SuperSleuth -6 points 3 years ago
I'm not saying the climate isn't changing but you have to account for population.
gAlienLifeform 12 points 3 years ago
Except the slope of your graph looks like a kicker ramp while OP looks more like a quarter pipe, so it really doesn't look like population growth can account for the uptick in heat deaths
SuperSleuth 1 point 3 years ago
Still a 4x population increase since 1970. The point is op's graph is misleading not climate change doesn't exist. Even then you still have to account for demographics and such. Here's a more dramatic graph for you:
gAlienLifeform 1 point 3 years ago
Still a ~10x increase in heat deaths.
And I don't know if it is misleading, why does it make sense to adjust for population here? Like, objectively more people are preventable dying from heat, and "There would be fewer preventable deaths if fewer people were around to die of preventable causes" isn't a very satisfying answer to that problem.
SuperSleuth 3 points 3 years ago
When looking at data on causes of death, adjusting for population size provides important context and allows us to make fairer comparisons over time. The raw number of deaths increasing could be due to a number of factors not directly related to topic. While that isn't the case here, it necessary to factor this in.
However, you raise a fair point - we should not lose sight of the real human impacts and absolute number of lives lost. Behind every statistic is an individual tragedy. We should have compassion for those suffering while also trying to objectively understand the data.
Perhaps there is room for nuance - we can acknowledge that adjusting for population provides useful perspective, while also recognizing that any preventable loss of life to extreme heat is highly concerning and worthy of solution-oriented discussion. If we aim for intellectual honesty and keep our shared goals of truth and human welfare in mind, we are more likely to have productive dialogues on complex issues like this. You'd call out opposing groups if they were to do this, but it's fine if it supports a narrative you agree with? We know the climate's changing we've all stepped outside. It's not necessary to use tactics like this to gain public favor.
voidMainVoid 2 points 3 years ago
What would that have to do with heat?
mayo 2 points 3 years ago
I looked up news articles after seeing the graph. Seems to be more about elderly and homeless. People touching knobs or falling on the concrete and receiving burns is a thing, but it's trending way up. Like 83C concrete... crazy hot.
Gradually_Adjusting 15 points 3 years ago
Ecofasism ☕
Gradually_Adjusting 8 points 3 years ago
Yikes to the max homie
MoonHawk 12 points 3 years ago
This is a bad take... Regions affected with mass migration, people without solid infrastructure, AC or clean water, people not able to move are in danger. They are not the ones polluting. Hypothetically you have 50% less people. Great. Think about who is still there and if pollution really is in decline then.
Kecessa 7 points 3 years ago
Problem is we're on our way to reach a point where even if we stopped all our GHG emissions, just the melting of the ice caps and thawing of the permafrost will be enough to create a self sustaining global warming event.
mayo 2 points 3 years ago
Literally our entire human civilization occurs during a stable climate. If the earth were hotter we'd probably never have reached 8 billion, or if we did it would have been through another way. This is going to be a rough ride, especially for the kids.
NewsAutoMod -13 points 3 years ago path: 0 1587222, hotness: undefined, score: -13, children: 3
Thekingoflorda 6 points 3 years ago
lol, forgot to add a check to rule out tweets.
afraid_of_zombies 4 points 3 years ago
Oh look you can block bots
Thekingoflorda 1 point 3 years ago
Yea, why would that not be possible?
afraid_of_zombies 3 points 3 years ago
Did you mean CBP?
news
@lemmy.world
39542
40348
9822
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
news
@lemmy.world
39542
40348
9822
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
I'm 110% on board with global warming, but this graph is misleading.
The author needs to at least correct for population changes (heat deaths per X residents). Even better would be to account for changing demographics, like age and county. From this random stats website, it looks like there has been a dramatic increase in proportion of older residents since 1970. Old people are more likely to die, so more elders = more deaths.
If I wasn't about to head to bed, I might try to fix it, but.... sleep.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure there has been an increase in small plane crashes in AZ. The hot air is much thinner than most pilots are used to, so they tend to forget accounting for changes in thrust and climb rates. I'm pretty sure a couple happened in just the last few weeks.
save