Japan Today
environment

Study projects millions of European heat deaths as world warms

25 Comments
By SETH BORENSTEIN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.


25 Comments
Login to comment

Extreme temperatures — mostly heat — are projected to kill as many as 2.3 million people in Europe

Projected by who? A computer model with dozens of unknown variables reaching out for decades? Who is supposed to swallow that?

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

Who is supposed to swallow that?

Likely the nebulous "world-wide experts and respected institutions" and all their followers.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Likely the nebulous "world-wide experts and respected institutions" and all their followers

You are an expert ( in an unspecified field ).

Is your PhD and area of research relevant to this?

Wannabe scientist incoming

Have you read a lot in this area? Maybe half the books written on it?

1 ( +8 / -7 )

May I suggest carry a fan and not mention is that people are living longer so body function deteriorate the longer you live. It not rocket science. It a product of living longer. So I assume this and latter generation that are living through these continuing higher temp that body function will adapt and will live even longer.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

It a product of living longer.

Yes, that is part of it. There are also many meds (e.g. to treat high blood pressure) and the fear of salt that make it harder to survive extreme heat.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

That will touch a RAW nerve, Yes I agree Salt is essential to long life.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Correct me ...but didnt Europe already have record temperatures and record numbers of deaths attributed to the heatwaves ?

I tread carefully on subjects now.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Projected by who? A computer model with dozens of unknown variables reaching out for decades? Who is supposed to swallow that?

The experts that have well defined methodologies to characterize and validate models, you seem to have the idea that the reports are just making random assumptions in a computer and can publish whatever the results are without anybody making sure the whole process is valid, nothing would be farther from the truth. For scientific reports this requires a detailed explanation of what factors were considered, references where the methods are confirmed as valid, etc. etc. Without an actual scientific argument against the reports you have no reason to doubt the conclusions, much less to misrepresent it as a random guess.

Likely the nebulous "world-wide experts and respected institutions" and all their followers.

You mean you still have not found any institution in the whole planet, in any country, that disagrees with what is constantly reported? because that is not nebulous, "all of them" is a perfectly clear description.

May I suggest carry a fan and not mention is that people are living longer so body function deteriorate the longer you live. It not rocket science.

When the deaths are well correlated with the climatic changes and not with a much more uniform elevation of age this argument loses all its value.

Yes, that is part of it. 

Not really, because the importance is how the changes in climate can be demonstrated to correlate with the deaths, countries that do not experience these changes as strongly do not have the increase of deaths, even when their population ages the same.

There are also many meds (e.g. to treat high blood pressure) and the fear of salt that make it harder to survive extreme heat.

You have repeatedly made this claim, yet you can never find any support for it even when challenged, that means it is just a personal belief not rooted on reality.

Yes I agree Salt is essential to long life.

On adequate quantities, else it becomes a reason for shorter lives.

Correct me ...but didnt Europe already have record temperatures and record numbers of deaths attributed to the heatwaves ?

With every year the records are broken and higher numbers are reported, that is why this can seem familiar.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Didnt mean it to be familiar, as in discard, but as established facts that need to be addressed.

I am no science denier. I am perplexed why people still disbelieve the science.

And, no need for the usual suspects to respond.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Projected by who? A computer model with dozens of unknown variables reaching out for decades? Who is supposed to swallow that?

The experts that have well defined methodologies to characterize and validate models,

Are these the same experts with well defined methodologies validated models that have a long history of making massively overestimated predictions... that were used to influence policy?

I am perplexed why people still disbelieve the science.

Science is not a consensus that must be believed. It should be questioned, rather than blindly believed. Also, I'm not a big fan of modelling, they have a long history of getting things wrong....

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Yes Beer...but I feel the science is in and pockets of resistance are more about, for individuals at least, contrariness .

I KNOW there are well financed campaigns to discredit the science.

I thought science was ,in part, a consensus .

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Didnt mean it to be familiar, as in discard, but as established facts that need to be addressed.

Yes, but with each year the established facts are renewed, in 2024 it was reported record heat and deaths, in 2025 it is reported new records of heath and deaths. What I mean is that this is not something entirely new never said before but something that once again is demonstrated, just in higher degree.

Are these the same experts with well defined methodologies validated models that have a long history of making massively overestimated predictions... that were used to influence policy?

Which "overstimated predictions" are you talking about? you keep bringing examples of people that were not scientists on the first place or predictions that were averted precisely because of global action.

Science is not a consensus that must be believed

You got it wrong, in science a consensus is not something dogmatic to be believed, is something that is reached when everybody ends up with the same conclusions after examining the evidence.

I'm not a big fan of modelling, they have a long history of getting things wrong....

And getting things extremely right, as the current situation demonstrates. Without any actual scientific criticism of the model a personal belief have no value as an argument. People still deny germ theory because "doctors have a long history of getting things wrong..." obviously that does not make microbes and infection less of a stablished fact.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

I KNOW there are well financed campaigns to discredit the science.

Oh, but there are much more highly financed campaigns to promote the mainstream "science" narrative, whether it's man-made global warming, big pharma, big food...

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Oh, but there are much more highly financed campaigns to promote the mainstream "science" narrative, whether it's man-made global warming, big pharma, big food...

Standard alternative media watcher response.

Let’s go from experience.

As a practicing scientist, what would you recommend to steer clear of such influences?

Is it just a question of honesty and integrity?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

It does not matter if you believe the "man-made global warming" narrative or not.

Making population predictions decades out into the future based on countless unknowable parameters is nonsensical either way. Depending on what guesswork you enter, you can get any desired result. Any programmer can tell you that.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

Zaphod above....theme of Rumsfeld's "known unknowns " ?

I feel your concerns.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

GuruMick

Zaphod above....theme of Rumsfeld's "known unknowns " ?

I feel your concerns.

Rumsfeld was funny with that. Now you tell us how you can precisely project demographic, geographic and climate developments decades out in the future. Not holding my breath.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Projected by who? A computer model with dozens of unknown variables reaching out for decades? Who is supposed to swallow that?

You could try reading the full paper at the link below, and then point out any issues.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03452-2

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Oh, but there are much more highly financed campaigns to promote the mainstream "science" narrative, whether it's man-made global warming, big pharma, big food...

Of which you never provide any evidence, so they can be safely discarded as inexistent, after all it is impossible for anybody reasonable to believe every single institution of science is in the conspiracy, it is beyond irrational. It is just the same excuse of every antiscientific group, flat earthers, creationists, etc.

It does not matter if you believe the "man-made global warming" narrative or not.

Believing it or not does not change the fact that it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Making population predictions decades out into the future based on countless unknowable parameters is nonsensical either way.

No, not really intervals of confidence are good enough to give a very good idea of what will happen, for example the predictions for climate change have been continuously inside those intervals. You are confused between predicting details (the temperature of one specific day of the year in the future) and predicting things that are general (the increase of temperature on a year-scale). The first is not realistic, the second is routinely done with success.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Zaphod...my email explaining everything is on the way...be patient...

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

you have no reason to doubt the conclusions :

https://junkscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Wrong-Again-50-Years-of-Failed-Eco-pocalyptic-Predictions-Competitive-Enterprise-Institute.pdf

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Correct me ...but didnt Europe already have record temperatures and record numbers of deaths attributed to the heatwaves ?

Yeah. Europe has deaths due to heat at around 10x of that in the U.S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you have no reason to doubt the conclusions :

Exactly what I mentioned, declarations of people that are not experts, avoiding things because the world actually did something, etc.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming/

So yes, you have no reason, no argument to doubt the conclusions, being in denial is of course not an argument.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Virus No wrong. Your science doesn't stand up to scepticism and without the rigour apply by sceptics you can not obtain the correct consensus or outcome.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Virus No wrong. Your science doesn't stand up to scepticism and without the rigour apply by sceptics you can not obtain the correct consensus or outcome.

You have never brought any actual scientific argument, that is because there are no "sceptics" about climate change, there are science deniers that take pride in being irrational and just repeat debunked claims. Those kind of things are much better ignored since they bring nothing to a discussion.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites