Global Warming: Good for Your Health?
Six centuries after the Black Death ravaged Europe, the gruesomeness of the disease and its hopeless, unavoidable death sentence still assault the human psyche. Rarely a week would pass from the time the disease’s first symptoms appeared – usually an egg-sized tumor on the groin, neck, or armpit – until the victim died a painful, agonizing death. The Black Death was ravenous and gluttonous, killing off half of Europe’s population and a fifth of the global population. The disease inspired Edgar Allan Poe to write perhaps the most chilling of his short horror stories, The Masque of the Red Death.
What brought about the Black Death? … the Little Ice Age ….
Famine and plague, which had largely disappeared during the Medieval Warm Period, became the norm rather than the exception. And by 1350, the grim, cold climate brought about the dreaded Black Death.
Even today it is clear that cold, not heat, is deadlier to human condition. Official U.S. mortality statistics show 800 more people die each day during the winter than during the summer. And those numbers are not a coincidence. In an article published in the Southern Medical Journal, W. R. Keatinge and G. C. Donaldson noted, “Cold-related deaths are far more numerous than heat-related deaths in the United States, Europe, and almost all countries outside the tropics, and almost all of them are due to common illnesses that are increased by cold.”
Full piece by James Taylor in Forbes worth reading.
A very interesting article. I really wish environmental activists would weigh the human cost of the policies for which they fight so vigorously.
I had never heard about the Little Ice Age contributing to the Black Death. I read that it was possibly a drought in China that drove rats to seek new territory, some of which climbed on ships.
Good post.
It is also interesting to consider that the causes of global warming are the result of an industrialized world — a world where innovation increased standards of living, average life spans, infant mortality rates, etc. This article provides yet another stark comparison of the divide between human well being and the preservation of the “natural condition” of the world.
Warm is good. Cold is bad. That’s a general principle that can explain a lot about evolution and the propagation of life forms.
Reading the Taylor article, I couldn’t find any reference for the idea that the little ice age caused the black death plague. I tried researching this on Google, and I haven’t heard this from any other source.
There were a number of different episodes of black death and different species of Rats and bacteria were involved.
If Goodman has any scholarly reference that shows this, he should cite it it. If not, it simply an idea invented by global warming deniers.
I enjoy this progression of conservative arguments against global warming:
1. Global warming is a hoax perpetuated by the scientific community/liberal media/environmental lobby (insert favorite bogeyman here)
2. Global warming is real, but it is not man-made
3. Global warming is man-made, but it’s not a problem.
4. Global warming may be a man-made problem but the cost of stopping it is too high.
and finally,
5. Global warming is good for you
Fascinating. I’ll be honest, I never saw that one coming. The article also conveniently overlooks the potential problems associated with rising sea levels, flooding, and extreme weather that many scientists believe may be caused by global warming.
Mr. Goodman, Following your post “Krugman Gets It Wrong Again”, the analysis on Incidental Economist seems to demand a response from you. If you’re correct, some clarification is required. If you’re not correct, the honorable thing would be to acknowledge the error.
Your responses to comments show that you read and follow up on comments. You have so far failed to support your assertions or to acknowledge your error. Please address the issue in a thoughtful way.
Geof:
Devon Herrick responded on my behalf earlier today. Unlike this blog (which accepts all comers without moderation) you have to go thru the filer over there. And they still haven’t approved Devon’s response. (Go figure.)
Anyway, they are wrong. And it’s surprising that they are defending Krugman on this given their strong attachment to evidence based blogging.
If they don’t post Devon’s response soon, i’ll post it at this site.
John:
I just looked through the trash/disapproved comments and don’t see one from anyone named Devon Herrick and didn’t see any denied posts related to the post in question at all. We have also moved to comment moderation, but certainly don’t censor just because someone disagrees with what we write. The moderation policies of TIE are here http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/policies/
“Even today it is clear that cold, not heat, is deadlier to human condition.” I think you mean that cold is deadlier to human beings, not to the “human condition,” but I cannot be sure because your construction is unclear. it seems that your analysis of climate change and your talent for syntactical construction are equivalently weak. Perhaps you could excuse yourself from “journalism” find suitable work and a more satisfying life at one of the “think tanks” supported by the fossil fuel industry. I hear The Heritage Foundation is always looking for a few good climate science deniers.
Mr Goodman,
I don’t care who writes it, but I haven’t seen any reply to the point that cost growth per beneficiary in Medicare has been slower than in private insurance plans. This is a more valid benchmark to determine efficiency than growth of total expenditures.
In addition it has been shown that Medicare denies more claims than most private insurance companies on a fractional basis. This makes Medicare look parsimonious on its face. Furthermore, the lower reimbursement rate is a way of squeezing the overcompensated medical system, and forcing economies.
@ Eric
I received an error message from the Incidental Economist’s web server when I tried to post a comment on Tuesday. I resent my response Wednesday morning.