Chelsea Clinton is worried that alleged global warming will cause 100,000 more diabetes cases in America each year, so she’s taking to Twitter to sound the alarm.
“Horrifying research shows correlation between global warming & rise in diabetes cases,” the aspiring politician posted Wednesday, along with a link to a Los Angeles Times story detailing the hysteria.
Horrifying research shows correlation between global warming & rise in diabetes cases: https://t.co/DYp6Sru91c
— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) March 22, 2017
According to the article, Dutch researchers noticed the number of diabetes cases claimed by the World Health Organization increased from 108 million in 1980 to 422 million in 2014. But instead of looking into how increasingly sedentary lifestyles and crappy food is fueling the problem, they decided to look into the weather.
“The researchers turned to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to gather data on the prevalence of diabetes in all 50 states for each year between 1996 and 2013. They also found the average temperature in each state in each year from the National Centers for Environmental Information,” the Times reports.
“Comparing the two, they found that the higher the average temperature in a particular time and place, the higher the age-adjusted incidence of diabetes. Overall, as the average annual temperature rose by 1 degree Celsius (or 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), the number of diabetes cases rose by 3.1 per 10,000 people.”
But that .00031 percent increase is only one of the “horrifying” findings.
“Obesity is a risk factor for Type 2 diabetes, and the researchers also found that each 1-degree Celsius temperature increase was associated with a 0.173% increase in the prevalence of obesity,” according to the Times.
“Even when the researchers adjusted for the prevalence of obesity in each state, they found that each 1-degree temperature increase was associated with 2.9 additional cases of diabetes per 10,000 people.”
That comes out to a .00029 percent increase in diabetes.
The researchers published their groundbreaking conclusions in the journal BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care, the news site reports.
They contend the correlation stems from how people use brown fat, based on other studies in recent years, rather than other more plausible possibilities, like less activity when people are warmer, or the types of foods available in different regions and different temperatures, an increase in processed food, or countless other logical reasons.
There’s also the facts, which seem to contradict global warming theory to begin with.
Friends of Science offer numerous “common misconceptions about global warming” that call into question many of the claims from the likes of Clinton and Al Gore, who alleged just this week that global warming is the “principal” cause of the Syrian Civil War and Brexit.
Friends of Science – “comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals” – exists to counter misleading information about “the hypothesis of human induced global warming” and present facts to politicians hell bent on fixing it.
According to the group:
The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling through 2011. The warming rate from 1964 to 1998 was the same as the previous warming from 1911 to 1941. Satellites, weather balloons and ground stations all show cooling since 2001. The mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8 C over the 20th century is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium.
The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas (“heat islands”), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas (“land use effects”). Two science teams have shown that correcting the surface temperature record for the effects of urban development would reduce the reported warming trend over land from 1980 by half. See here.
There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.