all 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 52 points 2 months ago (17 children)

It gets better, at current rates of carbon emission we have until ~2050 before the atmosphere increases bicarbonate levels to the point where basic metabolic processes begin to breakdown.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-026-01918-5

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    Can you break that down so I can understand better. It sounds bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago

    Too much carbon dioxide vs oxygen in the air. Your body cannot power itself and unless you find a supplemental source of oxygen, you asphyxiate in the destroyed atmosphere.

    Like trying to breathe on Mars.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    The PH levels in your blood are going to decrease, reducing storage for necessary elements of metabolic reactions (calcium, phosphorus) in the medium. This is going to impact children and the elderly first, where cellular death is going to slowly cascade across their bodies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    There is no evidence blood pH levels are affected. This is alarmist media. Are we going to ban soda?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Biochemist here. People on Lemmy should read links they post.

    As with any buffer system, the pH is balanced by the presence of both a weak acid (for example, H2CO3) and its conjugate base (for example, HCO−3) so that any excess acid or base introduced to the system is neutralized.

    A lot of academic labs love to get attention with alarmist claims, and assume the actual data was done properly.

    See DTT, see BPA, bullshit that never dies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    The literal paper that this post is about says multiple things about this subject. Did you read that paper?

    Thing #1 is that blood ph is decreasing in lockstep with atmospheric CO2.

    Thing #2 is that it appears the body's buffering system is stressed and is pulling additional calcium + phosphorus from the skeleton to aid in buffering.

    So your comment isn't wrong about the basic idea, you just didnt observe what's happening the larger context. PH is not only predicted to drop, we have already seen it drop, it's already started to happen.

    For this alarmist claim to be wrong, are you suggesting they cannot even accurately measure blood ph?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    There absolutely is, and you can do a simple experiment at home with some water, indicator solution (one can be made with red cabbage juice, but we used to use methylene blue when we did it at the science centre) and a soda water maker (or dry ice) to see it happen.

    It's not completely representative, obviously, but blood is mostly water and the same pH change we can see in carbonation water will happen to blood plasma.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    so we should ban carbonated beverages or not?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Do you perhaps mean ~2070 (50 years after the end of the study data date range)? I mean, both are really scary, the one just gives us a tad more time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    No, I mean 2050 is when we start to see linkable deaths. We don’t have time, that’s the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    But that's not what the article you linked said, so where are you getting 2050 from? The study says if CO2 continues to increase at the same current rate, we would be at the top end of the healthy max bicarbonate level by 2076. Do you have extra info that connects what is said in the article to 2050?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago*

    This 2024 study cuts off the trendline data in 2019. They give the annual rate of increase in CO2 concentration at "over 2ppm" which was the observed rate at that time.

    However the rate surged, and in 2024 it was + 3.75ppm, almost doubling the speed of increase from those predictions. This is what the OP comment means by "at current rates", the paper is way off from how fast things are moving now. We will get higher CO2 much sooner than what they predicted.

    The paper basically just says there is an almost linear relationship between atmosphere and blood chemistry, so if we get higher CO2 faster, the health effects will track that.

    So instead of 50 years until health effects, think ~ 30 years from now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago

    Wow, so we are actually cooked. From the inside!

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    geez. 7% since 99 so more than a quarter percent per year but I bet its going up faster more recently than at the turn of the millenia.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago

    My dad had COPD, which also increases the CO2 levels in the blood. His body was able to adapt to the gradual increase as his illness progressed, the problems arose when he had even the mildest illness, causing a rapid spike. His body couldn't adapt fast enough and suddenly he'd be on oxygen but still asphyxiating. It was awful.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago*

    Yes, you are a walking swamp in a balloon. What CO2 is doing to the ocean will also happen to your insides. There is only an extremely porous membrane between the two.

    We can also expect changes to our microbiome, water saturation levels, running temperature, etc, just like everything else.

  • source
  • 14 comments in c/science@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 14 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    How about a little something to lower your spirits, the physiological effects from rising CO2 include acute cognitive decline. Fortunately have not noticed cognitive decline in any human populations so far.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    You clearly haven't been to the US.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    https://youtube.com/shorts/YzA272JxLjM

    Sometimes I think the discussions here are due to cognitive gap instead of ideological differences.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Sometimes they are. But at least it isn't reddit or facebook. 😆

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    I didnt really understand just how useless the rosy glasses outlook were about this topic until I saw this video about the topic: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0KQYNtPl7V4&t=2874s&pp=ygUUYmFkZW1wYW5hZGEgYmFkIG5ld3M%3D and yes Its a long video but if you can somehow survive thisbvideo without seeking out therapy after? ...I would question if youre human. Seriously.

    And THAT is why Ill never buy a car or have kids. Im not hastening the armageddon or destroying a child's life. I feel sorry for those who already have kids....

  • source
  • [+] -6 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    The reality is that in earth hiatory the periods with most CO2 are the ones with most life.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    As soon as you don't just look at momentary values, but the change of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere the picture is a lot less rosy. Nature can adapt, but it operates in time scales that reduce all of human civilization to a tiny blip in the history of the planet. The current change is unprecedented and is much more akin to extreme events like meteor impacts or huge volcano eruptions.

    Actually looking at how nature has been and is changing right now affected by human made climate change, we are clearly steering towards an extinction event, not an era "with more life". Extinction means death. A lot of it. It's not the first extinction event of its kind, but catastrophic nonetheless.

    Will there be a recovery after a million years or so? Sure. Will there be anything resembling human civilization? No.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Indeeed!

    We should have ditched the rosy glasses baxk in the 50s when people started publishing studies that suggestwd the existenfe of climate change.

    I didnt really understand just how useless the rosy glasses outlook were about this topic until I saw this video about the topic: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0KQYNtPl7V4&t=2874s&pp=ygUUYmFkZW1wYW5hZGEgYmFkIG5ld3M%3D and yes Its a long video but if you can somehow survive thisbvideo without seeking out therapy after? ...I would question if youre human. Seriously.

    And THAT is why Ill never buy a car or have kids. Im not hastening the armageddon or destroying a child's life. I feel sorry for those who already have kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • 3 comments in c/science@mander.xyz view that post
    [–] 15 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Summary: Rising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may be leaving a measurable imprint inside the human body. Researchers analyzing more than two decades of U.S. health data found that blood bicarbonate levels have climbed about 7% since 1999, while calcium and phosphorus have declined—changes that closely track increasing atmospheric CO2.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    I guess it makes sense - the more CO2 you breath, the more your body has to deal with, and it's physiologically relevant.

  • source
  • 3 comments in c/environnement@jlai.lu view that post
    [–] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    "Mais qui aurait pu prévoir ?"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments