The human body performs best at sea level, where the atmospheric pressure is 101,325 Pa or 1013.25 millibars. The concentration of oxygen in sea-level air is 20.9, resulting in a partial pressure of 21.136 kilopascals (158.53 mmHg). In healthy individuals, this saturates the air. However, for conditions like HACE or HAPE, getting to a lower altitude can be beneficial.
There are over 700,000 people living above 4,500 meters (14,764 feet) of elevation, which is about the height of Mount Rainier, Mount Whitney, and more. Living at high altitudes has been associated with lower mortality from cardiovascular diseases, stroke, and certain types of cancer. Research suggests that people worldwide who live at high altitudes have a lower incidence of both cancer and heart disease than those who live closer to sea level.
Local exposure to high elevation can unleash a complex cascade of changes within red blood cells that make it easier for them to cope with low-oxygen environments. This can lead to an increase in the lungs’ ability to exchange gases efficiently, allowing every breath more oxygen to enter the bloodstream.
People living at higher altitudes tend to be healthier in general, but definitive evidence as to why remains elusive. Men live on average 1.2 to 3.6 years longer and women 0.5 to 2.5 years more when adjusted for other factors, including smoking. Overall, living and traveling at high altitudes have obvious and well-known impacts on everyone, but there are lesser-known and often elusive effects on our physical and mental health.
📹 Sea Level Rising – Living with Water | Earth Focus | Season 1, Episode 1 | KCET
Louisiana still is learning from Hurricane Katrina. Forecasts are dire for Louisiana to experience the second-highest sea level rise …
What is the #1 healthiest place to live in the US?
The cities in the United States with the lowest rates of poor physical health days per capita are also the healthiest cities overall.
Do people live longer at sea level?
A study found that Colorado and Utah have the highest life expectancy among the top 20 counties, with eleven men and five women living between 75. 8 and 78. 2 years. Men lived 1. 2 to 3. 6 years longer than women near sea-level. However, when considering socio-economic factors, solar radiation, smoking, and pulmonary disease, the net effect of altitude on overall life expectancy was negligible. Altitude may offer protection against heart disease deaths and may also play a role in cancer development.
Do you sleep better at sea level?
Sleep disruption at altitude is primarily due to hypoxia, a low oxygen level that affects the sleep center of the brain, leading to frequent awakenings, light, non-rested sleep, and reduced total sleep time. This issue is common even in full-time mountain residents, who struggle with sleep despite acclimatization. Periodic breathing, a pattern of periodic cessation of breathing for 10-20 seconds during sleep at high altitude, wakes individuals multiple times throughout the night due to low oxygen levels.
Although acute mountain sickness and insomnia are caused by low oxygen levels, they are separate issues. Periodic breathing, which involves periods of deep and shallow breathing or cessation of breathing (apnea), is common at high altitude and worsens with increasing altitude. Oxygen saturations drop during apneic phases, causing gasping and awakening.
Do you age faster at higher altitudes?
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has found that time moves more slowly for objects farther away from a gravitational field, such as Earth. This means that people living at high altitudes age a bit faster than those plodding through space-time at sea level. Gravity makes us age slower relative to other objects, and the whole world around us evolves more slowly under the effect of gravity. The differences are minor but measurable.
For example, if you were to sit at the peak of Mount Everest for 30 years, you would be 0. 91 millisecond older than if you had spent the same 30 years at sea level. Similarly, if twins living at sea level were to part ways for 30 years, the high-elevation twin would be 0. 17 millisecond older than their twin when they reunited.
Is living near the ocean good for your lungs?
18th century physicians prescribed seashore visits for patients with respiratory issues, as sea air, rich in iodine, salt, and magnesium, promotes respiratory health, reduces asthma symptoms, improves allergies, and stimulates the immune system. Sea water, rich in minerals like magnesium, chloride, sodium, potassium, iodine, and sulfur, has curative and anti-inflammatory effects on the skin. A 1999 study from the University of Freiburg found that a combination of sea water and UVB radiation can improve skin problems like dermatitis and psoriasis.
Living by the ocean has positive effects on both the body and mind, with exercise, sunlight, and fresh air boosting mood and mood. A 2019 study published in Health and Place found that people living closer to the ocean had lower mental distress, which gradually reversed as they moved inland. The researchers surveyed almost 26, 000 people and found that those living less than 1km from the sea were 22 less likely to have mental health symptoms compared to those living over 50km away.
Looking out at the ocean has a therapeutic effect, as the power of awe can make problems seem trivial when looking out at the ocean. Overall, living by the ocean can provide numerous health benefits for both the body and mind.
Do you age slower at sea level?
NIST researchers have found that time runs faster even a mere 0. 008 inch above the Earth’s surface. If you were to sit at the peak of Mount Everest for 30 years, you would be 0. 91 millisecond older than if you had spent the same 30 years at sea level. The study also showed that if twins living at sea level were to part ways for 30 years, the high-elevation twin would be 0. 17 millisecond older than their twin when they reunited.
Is lower altitude better for your heart?
A report by the Journal of the American Heart Association suggests that individuals with heart conditions who travel to high altitudes from sea level may face risks due to the stress placed on the heart and blood vessels. The study found that rigorous physical activities in high altitude locations can cause symptoms such as shortness of breath, dizziness, chest pain, and fatigue. Therefore, it is crucial for individuals with heart conditions to consider the potential risks before traveling to high altitudes.
Do you breathe better at sea level?
Altitude sickness is a health issue caused by the thinner atmosphere as you climb higher, making breathing in the same amount of air harder and resulting in less oxygen. People not accustomed to high altitudes are more likely to experience symptoms, especially if they ascend quickly or stay at high altitudes for long periods. Factors such as age, weight, blood pressure, respiratory capacity, smoking, alcohol, and sedatives can also increase the risk of developing altitude sickness. Medical diagnoses that affect breathing can also increase the risk. Almost everyone who ascends to 11, 000 feet or higher will develop altitude sickness.
Is it healthier to live closer to sea level?
Residing at sea level is advantageous for individuals with elevated blood pressure, as the increased oxygen levels in the air are conducive to optimal functioning of various bodily systems. For further information regarding the search for a new residence in proximity to the coastline, we invite you to visit our website or to contact us directly.
Why do people feel better at sea level?
At altitude, the partial pressure of oxygen in the air changes, with sea-level having a partial pressure of 159 mmHg and Mt Everest’s summit having a pressure of only 53 mmHg. This results in oxygen molecules being further apart, causing “hypoxia” or fewer oxygen molecules in the same volume of air as we inhale. The body responds to less oxygen in each breath by increasing ventilation and oxygen uptake. However, less oxygen remains in the circulatory system, limiting exercise performance.
Water loss increases within the first few hours of altitude exposure, leading to dehydration. Altitude can also increase metabolism while suppressing appetite, causing individuals to eat more to maintain a neutral energy balance.
What is the healthiest place on earth to live?
Spain, Italy, Iceland, Japan, Sweden, Australia, Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, and Canada are among the top 10 healthiest countries globally. The average life expectancy in these countries is 82 years, with Sweden having the highest at 83 years. Other countries like Italy, Iceland, Japan, Sweden, Australia, Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, and Canada also have high life expectancies. These countries have high life expectancies, making them a significant global health concern.
📹 Is sea level rising?: Benjamin P. Horton at TEDxNavesink
An analytical and historical look into the trend of rising sea levels, the effects of which are already being felt today, and the impact …
One must ask why the simple fact that it’s area is suffering from subsidence, is being ignored. The sea level is not rising, the numbers from 100 years ago are the same as now. However, ground levels in this area, Florida, and many others are dropping as much as three feet a year due mostly to ground water loss.
Sea levels are rising and fast. All due to greenhouse gas effect. Even if we could stop polluting the air today the effects will last at least ten years. I live in Crowley and wonder not if but when my house will be under water. That’s sad, however storm surge is scary. 😢 Government won’t save us. They are putting profits over life.
coastal Louisiana is a delta made of Mississippi River silt . flood control has stopped the accretion of silt and the land is slowly washing away . in addition extraction of oil and water from underground is causing the land to sink . the land is sinking faster than the sea is rising . ..houston is another place where water and oil extraction has caused the land to sink by several feet . …miami is sinking from ground water extraction and because much of the city is built on landfill . …all the places used to scare people about sea level rise are sinking faster than sea level is rising . in Scandinavia and Alaska sea level is falling because the land is rising . subsidence and uplift are major factors in sea level height .
I discovered a photo of Sydney Harbor taken in the 1860s showing the sea level against a lighthouse. When compared to a photo taken from the same spot today, the sea level is the same. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” – George Orwell.
This guy is in the process of saying or doing something in order to deliberately make people feel worried or frightened, especially so that he can gain an advantage. Sea levels started to rise in 1880. 70 years before co2 could have any impact on sea level. New York has a declining land. During last ice age New York was elevated due to ice mass pressure up north. Big ice masses was compressing land down and outwards so New York was elevated up being located on the outskirts. So now New York is falling back to lower land level. This is causing rising sea level. This is a fraud.
Funny when he shows what the rising sea levels will do to the great economic areas and how devastated they will be, as if everyone in Los Angeles and San Francisco and New York will just sit there perusal the water destroy everything and start crying and just try to keep living in their submerged house and driving on the submerged streets. Humans do have this curious ability move and build new stuff. And we obviously will if the sea levels do rise to that level. Even funnier is that there is an assumption that if “the governments” do “something” that it will automatically work and fix everything. Y’all think the government can fix the weather? What is that bill gonna look like? May be more expensive than moving LA to higher ground. What was the temperature “supposed” to be this last decade? Um, judging by the geological record who could possible know that? Answer: Intellectuals and experts who want to get government money to play with. Hmmmm….. y’all see that article in The Atlantic recently? “The Peculiar Blindness of Experts”? Talks about how experts are HORRIBLE at predicting the future, especially in the area where they are experts. And I’m not even a climate “denier,” I’m just climate curious….
Pull up the tidal gauge history for NYC going back to President Lincoln. The sea level has been “rising” 2.78 mm per year, and the rate hasn’t changed at all. The “rise” is mostly due to the land sinking on the East coast, whereas on the West coast the land isn’t sinking. The seas have risen 400 ft. since 20,000 years ago – there’s nothing we can do about it.
75ft or about 23m rise over about 10000 years = 2.3mm per year average, other graphs show 10mm/yr in some periods). He said it himself, the area of major impact were already unstable and were sinking not MSL rise The 1mm per year for the last 100 years from relative stable locations like Fort Denison (Sydney, Australia). Satellite data has to be re-calibrated and adjusted to match previous data. If it’s that inaccurate to require shifts of 75mm and relies on re-calibrations and instrument drift then I question their accuracy to measure mm’s. (Therefore) These points make the claims of 3mm/yr being extraordinarily dangerous look rather ordinarily natural.
“There’s hundreds of millions of people living on the coasts around the world. If sea levels rise these people will have to be relocated.” Well, I’ve lived on the coast for 50 years. If sea level keeps rising at the rate it has been over the past 50 years, I’m going to have to relocate some time in the next 10 or 12 thousand years.
The data here is dubious on sea level height, satellite data is not accurate enough, even NASA has clearly stated this. Figures do not take into account decaying orbits or the accuracy of the devices of measurement. My local estuary gauges have shown on average of 10mm rise in the past 50 years not 100mm, there is a factor of 10 out here. Could it be the land is subsiding, not according to geological survey reports, so what’s happening?
This talk is completely pointless. We all know that sea level has been rising for thousands of years and will probably continue to do so, albeit at a tiny 3mm per year. The claim that extreme weather is becoming more frequent is completely bogus. If anything, extreme weather events are less frequent as the poles have warmed more than the equatorial regions, so the temperature gradient between the two is less. I struggle to understand the current crop of climate alarmists who ignore facts and blame all climate change upon humankind.
He’s waaaaaaaay off at 6:20 “temperatures were about 2 to 3 degrees C warmer than they are today. The Eemian Optimum had Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) of 0.3 degrees higher than present not “2 to 3 degrees C warmer”. That’s a massive mistake. Climate will be set equal to the Eemian Optimum in 20 years. The Greenland ice sheet (GIS) surface temperature was 5-8 degrees higher than present but that’s just because it takes decades for the ice sheets to start responding and they haven’t had decades to respond yet. There is no doubt based on good paleo climate data that the commitment to lose 1,400,000 km**3 of water off the West Antarctic ice sheet (WAIS) and 1,100,000 km**3 of water off the Greenland ice sheet (GIS). It happened over 500 years at 124,000 years ago but it’s starting to look like it’ll happen over 200 years this time because humans have decided to push it much faster (per Eric Rignot who actually measures the ice acceleration in detail).
I see 4 main factors to look into (especially the 1st 2. 1. Will gravitational pull towards the poles weaken as ice at the poles melts, thus leading to a greater sea level rise at the equator than in more northern and southern hemispheres? 2. If land mass rises over time due to the lack of weight pushing it down from where ice used to lay will this mean that land masses elsewhere will sink to compensate? 3. If global sea currents change routes or direction doe to temperatures within the ocean changing then will the sea drop in some places where currents used to constantly push the water up against certain land masses and in exchange will other areas now have water pushed against them constantly, perhaps creating a rise along certain coasts? 4. Planets tent to dry out or die over billions of years. Hydrogen is lost to space and replaced by dust from space. Could geological data from previous glacial periods now be irrelevant as we may simply have a different amount of water on the planet now? From what i see most of the sea level rise has already happened and we should be looking for such evidence. There was a great deal more ice by far if you look back 20 or 30,000 years. even 10,000 ago we had a far greater amount of ice on the planets surface. There are ather factors to consider such as global humidity and the sponging up of water into land, perhaps also compression and meniscus effects in water.
20,000 years ago the ocean level was purported to 400 feet lower than today and that was the end of the iceage. From then until now rapid sea level rise has stopped and is dropping and this is the beginning of the new iceage. Like an hour glass runs out of sand, is the beginning of a new era. We had the 20,000 years of global warming. Record cold and snow in 2019 shows the Milankovitch Cycle, solar cycle relationships with VOLCANISM and cosmic rays effect upon cloud neucliation that brings about atmospheric rivers flooding with cold and snow at the lower elevations, killing crops. Better question GLOBAL WARMING FRAUDSTERS as they make 300 million dollars, like the fraudulent Al GORE.
The Milankovitch Cycle was accepted in 1976 as it relates to the orbital rotation that is related to the weather patterns change and notably to equatorial ocean bulge and the bulge that uplifts the Earth’ s crust. The changing of the Milankovitch Cycle distance to the sun has a dramatic change of weather patterns. Today, volcano eruptions output of CO2, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide and atmospheric acid, is far greater than mankind can put out. His presentation is blaming mankind. The truth is the 1973 movie SOYLENT GREEN timeline was projected year 2022. Plot was crop failure, food shortages, city squalor, homelessness, grid failure, government lies and cover-up, assisted suicide and cannibalism. I’m 64 and as a child I played upon the beach of Galveston Island and today, I see no sea level rise. But, I have studied the lies that Al GORE has made. Tony Heller, debunks the lies that our government tax dollars pay for as the movie SOYLENT GREEN had shown that they are hiding the truth.
I live in a town in Scotland with a Royal charter that goes back to 1205 as a trading port and harbour. There are many photos since the invention of cameras and many etchings that go back hundreds of years. There is little to no visual evidence of a change in our local sea level. Our old bridge crossing goes back to the 15th century and there are many paintings and etchings showing water level. Scotland is allegedly a rising land mass due to post glacial response at c. 1mm per year. I appreciate that this lecture does give account to all effects even if I am suspicious of the absolute rise projections. I like that Benjamin does recognise that fluid extraction (oil, gas WATER) causes the land to sink. South East Florida extracts BILLIONS OF GALLONS of water every day to service the local population from the Floridian Aquifer. This equates to c. 10 large oil tankers out the ground every day. All we get in the media is its global warming. NO NO NO. From palm beach to the Keys 8 million people are over extracting water and causing coastal south east Florida to sink where the geometry and conditions of the aquifer are the worst case scenario for causing the land to sink. Well done this man for putting the facts out there but he stopped short of stating the obvious that water extraction is causing the alarmist high tide articles of flooding CAUSED BY THE FLORIDA RESIDENTS THEMSELVES… if sea level rise was a big problem the Maldives would have gone a long time ago. Little to no change there though they also extract fresh water from below their feet BUT it does not cause sinking as it is an open system unconstrained so the water just turns salty.
Multiple analysis of tide gauge data conclude at 95% confidence zero acceleration in the rate of sea level rise, Horton is dealing with information very “loosely” saying historical rates of 5mm/yr are “similar” to today where tide gauge data shows 1.7mm/yr global average. Recent analysis by PJ Watson of Australian, US and European tide gauge data show zero acceleration. Horton is basing his alarmist projections on IPCC futuristic computer models.
Venice,Italy best example of very natural sea level rise. About 88 inches in1500 years. No man made pollution involved. Kinda blows idea that if we let legislators control us it will all go away. I am convinced if man disappeared, the sea will still rise. By the way, NASA confirmed 1.5 mm rise last year.
My argument is why Greenland when discovered by the Vikings was virtually ice free with vast forests? This was only around 5-600 years ago. That situation to the present day is a monumentally short period of time from one extreme to another! It was name Grunlanqd for that reason as it was green. Just not sure why Iceland was accordingly named, can anyone elaborate with that for me pls?
The Anglophone empires were maritime. Accordingly, they invested heavily in their ports and associated cities, London, New York, Sydney etc. Nations without that maritime history have their capitals inland, Paris, Berlin, Moscow, Beijing… As the “Right” have weaponised climate change denial in America and certain other Anglo nations, they have endowed themselves with tax cuts and thus diminished the capacity to respond collectively to crises. Now, whether they deny it or not, they face two crises, the need to respond to China rising and the need to respond to inundation. Will they be able to respond to one? Certainly not both. Vale the Anglosphere. Humanity, that remains to be seen.
Visited the Maldives lately? It was supposed to be mostly gone by now, as in the ’80s the islands would be submerged 30 years from then. Meanwhile several islands of the Maldives have gained surface area, and the government is opening five new airports this year. Not to evacuate desperate inhabitants, but to accommodate the many thousands tourists visiting the newly built beach resorts. If the gouvernments and institutes preaching global warming gloom and doom would believe their own stories, would they really poor their money into such dangerous islands, about to be submerged?
Since the end of last ice age sea levels are rising. During the last centuries with a constant rate of 3 mm per year. This rate seems not to be sensitive to increasing anthropogene CO2 emissions and the moderate global mean temperature increase of 0.8 degrees C since 1850 when the little ice age ended thanks god. Without being a climate scientist i make the prediction, that we can expect the sea levels rising another 3 mm x 80 = 240 mm during the remaining 80 years until end of the century. Enough time to prepare i would think.
It seems so many are willing to concede to these ‘collectors of data’ the power to take important decisions about our future just because they are predicting gloom and doom for that future. The ability to collect data does not automatically grant one the ability to interpret that data so as to predict all that will happen. Just because one can see a real problem on the horizon, it doesn’t mean that person is automatically qualified as an expert in solving that problem.
Mother Nature taking care of the drought inflicted on her from all the farming, the resulting low water levels and resulting deserts . I think we upset the co2 and Mother Earth is going to equalize. If she melts some ice and raises water levels to re-grass her-self, surely humans can adapt,small price to pay for a new growth world, by then fossil fuels will be just a memory .If the banker’s politicians don’t completely enslave us we might be all right. Get a new hobby benji
I was really worried about all of the hotbeds of conspiracy theorists (of every kind(!)) on youtube because the article recommendation algorithms just feed them more of what they watched before, so people go down these rabbit holes with no sense of how far they have drifted. I am a coder, and I was wondering what I would do to solve this if I were youtube, and I just didn’t know. But now in matters of scientific fact, youtube has sometimes started linking articles to teach about them, regardless of what position is taken in the article. This is good news.
whats amazing is that the temperature of the Antarctic ice sheet hasn’t been above 0 deg c in 15 million years but he wont tell you that. and any ice in water melting wont raise the level as ice has the same cubic area as water, volume for volume. and during the last ice age there was an ice shelf 2 miles thick covering the magority of the northern hemisphere, but hey they wont tell you that either
Another thing which might sound small, but has increased immensely in the last 5 years with Asian countries having a higher income, is the amount of land that is now covered with concrete, ( including huge traffic infrastructure projects on valuable rice paddy fields ), now the majority of the run off goes straight into the waterways, and then into the seas, this must be contributing to lower water tables and land subsidence as well?
I have been going occasionally to a seaside town open to the Tasman sea ever since I was a kid for 55 years . I have been to the wharfs and shorelines etc where we used to play and I can very readily say there has been no noticeable sea level rise anywhere, no new sea walls, no erosion of coast line, beaches all exactly the same . If there has been sea level rise it cannot been seen nor is a problem for 55 years at least .
I live in Northern California and, in the last 4 years we have experienced forest fires on an unseen scale; brought on by a 5 year drought, and invasive species like the Japanese Bark Beatles. The Beatles took their tole on our trees, but it wasn’t until the drought that millions of trees died within our forests. These dead trees were fuel for the fires that destroyed so many people’s property. This is but one small example of the effects of global warming, as I have met folks who are visiting the San Francisco Bay Area from, Alaska, Texas, and elsewhere around the US, who likewise speak about the effects of global warming on these places which they have called home. Around the world, billions of people are unable to relocate for many reasons, so they will like so many in New Orleans find themselves subjected to the full force of nature; while the ruling class will for a time be able to simply relocate. In time however, the impact of global warming will bring forth a massive extinction which will impact even the wealthiest among us. Sadly, while there may still be things we can do to help undo the damage we have done to the planet, so many of us see it as someone else’s problem that; we may very well bring about our own extinction.
@”Adam Connolly” who asks a question without (for some reason) providing a “reply” button: “Since 1993, measurements from the TOPEX and Jason series of satellite radar altimeters have allowed estimates of global mean sea level height. These measurements are continuously calibrated against a network of tide gauges. When seasonal and other variations are subtracted, they allow estimation of the global mean sea level rate. As new data, models and corrections become available, these estimates are continuously revised these (about every two months) to improve their quality. – See more at: climatedataguide.ucar.edu/”
This teacher said something weird at 3:53. “As seawater warms it’s volume increases. This thermal expansion accounts for around 50% of the past century s sea level rise”. In reality it is a tiny amount. A volume of Water at 200 degrees is 3 percent bigger than at 80 degrees. The confirmation experiment should be easy to do. Pour one cup of boiling water into a Pyrex measuring cup. Let it cool to room temp. I wonder if you can even see any difference in volume?
I notice he uses tide gauges until 1992, thereafter he uses satellite data. he says the tide gauges show approx a 2 mm per year rise but now the the rate is over 3 per the satellite data. He then argues that this increase in rate is proof of global warming and we must all be afraid (to paraphrase). What I would like to know is what do the tide gauges say from 92 to present? do they agree with the satellites? if they are not in agreement you can not say that the sea level is rising faster. Why were the tide gauges considered accurate before 1992 but not after. This argument he is making is flawed from the start. One nice thing to say about him and his talk, I found it refreshing to hear him acknowledge the maunder minimum and the medieval warm period after Michael Mann’s attempt to erase them. Inch by inch they are having to back off their ridiculous claims and attempts to rewrite history to remove the evidence that their theory is without merit
I watched this until the part about more frequent or severe storms. Which, is a complete falsification. Even the data on Wikipedia (a climate alarmist hangout if ever there was one) shows that the early part of the 20thC suffered worse storms than now. Basically, I get the impression that Mr Horton has a good grasp of the science and knows perfectly well that the alarmist claims are a hoax. I guess he has to say what he did, or lose his job. Just like Peter Ridd.
Hey Ben, the Holocene is our current Epoch, we’re still in it. Also, if you examine data from the Greenland Ice Cores you see variances roughly 150 to 170 years long throughout the entirety of the Holocene that correlate to periods of warming and cooling cycles. We’ve been in a warming cycle since the 1870s. If the pattern holds true then we’re probably going to have a cooling cycle in the near future. Let’s ease up on the doom and gloom dude, humanity is pretty adaptable.
Stop paying all these academics and put the money into an emergency fund. These people aren’t useful to solving the problem (that may well not be so much of problem as predicted). Building on the coast has always had problems. People just build further back when the coast erodes and cities sink under their own weight and poor ground.