Fwd: [Holobionts] CO2 as a pollutant и фактор оглупления человечества

[Bulat Yessekin]

Из выступления Уго Барди: график отупления людей- в связи с изменением СО2-кислорода

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EsFbFRfWdQPjgylqE075SXu-Jyt5mHz7/view?usp=sharing\

Best regards,

Bulat K. YESSEKIN

---------- Forwarded message ---------
От: Anastassia Makarieva <ammak...@gmail.com>
Date: пт, 23 авг. 2024 г. в 11:01
Subject: Re: [Holobionts] CO2 as a pollutant
To: Ugo Bardi <prudent...@gmail.com>
Cc: Михаил Войтехов <mihail-...@yandex.ru>, The Holobionts <theproudh...@googlegroups.com>

Dear colleagues,

Ugo presented this work at our Munich conference, here is the link for you to watch

https://youtu.be/DRl7XWAUMeQ

Kind regards,

Anastassia

ср, 21 авг. 2024 г. в 18:44, Ugo Bardi <prudent...@gmail.com>:

It is an interesting idea. I can say that your friend was very brave, and also lucky, because over 5% Carbon dioxide can be lethal.

But I can't understand his way of reasoning. How would CO2 prevent blood clotting? (is that what he means?) At such concentrations of CO2, your body is desperately scrambling to avoid blood acidosis. It means pumping calcium ions from bones to the blood. What effect can that have on blood vessels, is hard to say, although it won't probably kill you in the short run. Maybe it has to do with affecting the cellular zeta potential? You always discover new things in this field...

U

On 8/19/2024 8:04 PM, Михаил Войтехов wrote:

Ugo, once, about 40 years ago, I communicated with a young doctor (I don't even remember his name). who justified the hypothesis that the optimal air CO2 concentration is about 4.5% for human health, because at what air CO2 concentration deposits do not occur on the blood vessels walls that disrupt the blood vessels conductivity. In his opinion, the blood biochemistry was formed by the man distant ancestors in the Cretaceous period, when there was such a CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. To test his hypothesis, he even slept at night in a gas mask so that the CO2 concentration in the inhaled air increased due to exhaled air. According to him, he has not observed any harmful effects of this practice. However, I am not an expert in blood biochemistry and cannot comment on either his hypothesis or your reasoning.

Mihail

 

 

19.08.2024, 20:07, "Ugo Bardi" <prudent...@gmail.com>:

Dear fellow holobionts,

my paper on CO2 is on line on "ArXiv" -- it has been a lot of work to put it together, but now it is done.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08344

The basic idea of the paper is that the whole debate on climate change is skewed toward the effects of global warming, neglecting the chemical effects of CO2 on the ecosystem. These effects include ocean acidification and metabolic alterations of practically all living creatures. Here is what I write in the introduction:

The effects of high CO2 concentrations are not easy to measure in quantitative terms but have been known since the 19th century under the name of “hypercapnia” (from the Greek hyper, "above" and kapnos, "smoke"). Common symptoms are dyspnea (breathlessness), nausea, headache, confusion, lethargy, and other symptoms. These effects are attributable to various factors but have been demonstrated to be related to reduced oxygen flow to tissues and to the brain [8]. It is known that CO2 concentrations over ca. 50,000 ppm are lethal, while it is normally believed that values up to 5,000 ppm are acceptable for limited periods of time. Values under 1,000 ppm are considered safe inside homes. The effect of lower concentration is less clear, but recent results show that even lower concentrations can have measurable negative effects on the human metabolism, and affect the human brain in terms of the capability of performing complex tasks [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. The results of these studies have been criticized for internal inconsistencies and other problems [18]. It is clear that we need more and better studies to determine with certainty the effect of CO2 on human metabolism at these concentrations. But the available data nevertheless point to serious potential problems. We are introducing into the environment an active substance that we know is lethal at high concentrations. We don’t know what an acceptable lifetime exposure limit could be, and not even if it exists. The only thing we know is that current concentrations have never been experienced by human beings during their evolutionary history of the past few million years. Additionally, nowadays people tend to live in closed spaces where the CO2 concentrations are typically higher than those in the open, not rarely well above 1000 ppm. The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere continues to rise at an increasingly faster rate, now being near 3 ppm per year. If this trend continues, it is clear that we are moving into an unknown territory with risks that cannot be neglected.

The idea of CO2 as a pollutant changes many of the current rules of the game, including the idea that the rich can do better than the poor in a hotter world because they have air conditioned, while the poor don't (just as it was said of the Maxim gun at the time of colonial wars). But the rich and the poor breathe the same air, and that means that no one can think they can cheat the game. This paper goes straight against the current propaganda effort that aims at presenting CO2 as "food for plants" and hence a harmless substance. You could say the same for manure, but you don't want having a lot of it in your home. So, we are at a critical juncture of the question.

Of course, a paper uploaded to ArXiv by a single scientists means little or nothing. We need to muster a group of people who can tackle this highly multi-disciplinary and complex matter. So, first of all, I would greatly appreciate your opinion on the paper: it does not claim to be perfect, and I am sure it needs to be improved. Then, we'll see what the next step could be.

Thanks for your attention, and onward, as usual!

UB