essaysfromtheedge

"...and the fever is high."

An interesting story today from Australia's Herald Sun:

Fever claim on global warming

The University of Sidney, Australia, did a two-year statistical study at The Children's Hospital at Westmead. The study was investigating the effects of temperature rise on fever rates among children under six years old.

The result?

The two-year study at a major children's hospital showed that for every five-degree rise in temperature two more children under six years old were admitted with fever to that hospital.

A cursory reading would seem to indicate that a major problem in children's health is looming, and that climate change (read: "global warming") is the causative factor.

This conclusion is jumped at fairly quickly by researcher Lawrence Lam, a paediatrics specialist.

Dr Lam said the results, collated from The Children's Hospital at Westmead admissions, back up beliefs that children are less able to regulate their bodies against climate change than adults.

The brain's thermal regulation mechanism is not as well developed in children, making them more susceptible to "overheating" and at risk of developing illness, he said.

Once again the alarm is being sounded, and the gong is being beaten; the drums of global warming war are thundering, and the tide is moving relentlessly towards the tipping point of dire consequences.

Enough hyperbole for you?

Dig a little deeper into the article and you'll find the caveat:

[Dr Lam] said it was still unclear whether the heat directly triggered the illnesses or whether other heat-related problems, like pollution, were responsible.

There are two problems here:

First, Fevers are caused by the body fighting a disease, usually a virus. The fever mechanism is symptomatic of the body's chemical and biological attempt to defeat the invading organism. While fevers can be life-threatening, they are a natural part of our ability to resist, and develop immunity, to the myriads of microorganisms that populate our planet.

Fevers are NOT caused by warm temperatures, in the same way that colds are NOT caused by cold temperatures. Temperature conditions can have a slight effect of lowering the body's resistance to disease, but the factors involved are far more complicated than just a rise or a fall in temperature. [The ostensible exception here being Heat Stroke, which is actually caused by dehydration and over-exertion during hot weather, not by the heat itself.]

[Note, also, that the study did not take into account the fever rates among children who live in warmer climates versus the fever rates among children who live in colder climates.]

The second problem is the nature of the "study" itself. Note at the top of this article I said that the Sidney study was a "statistical" study. As is typical in statistical studies, causative relationships are tautological at best: "when temperatures go up we see more fevers in children under six, so when temperatures go up we expect more fevers in children under six."

Statistical studies can prove nothing. Take, for example, a study that finds that people who have vehicles tend to also have cell phones. Many conclusions can be drawn from this type of data mining, including the notion that having a vehicle causes increased cell phone possession.

The second flaw is that these types of studies are set up to look for specific cause-and-effect relationships, thus they begin from flawed premises. In this case, "The study was investigating the effects of temperature rise on fever rates among children under six years old."

If this is the type of "science" we can continue to expect from global warming supporters - thus throwing more fuel onto the fire being fanned by the Global Warming Fascists - we can expect to see a continued heating up of the fanaticism surrounding this issue.

Which is about the only heat we're likely to see.



-

posted by Tomás @ 2/22/2007 09:25:00 AM