Global pollinator losses causing 500,000 early deaths a year – study Insect declines mean reduced yields of healthy foods like fruit and vegetables and increased disease in people A bee sits on a flower budding from an almond tree. Three-quarters of crops require pollination. Photograph: Amir Cohen/Reuters Damian Carrington Environment editor Mon 9 Jan 2023 10.00 GMT The global loss of pollinators is already causing about 500,000 early deaths a year by reducing the supply of healthy foods, a study has estimated. Three-quarters of crops require pollination but the populations of many insects are in sharp decline. The inadequate pollination that results has caused a 3%-5% loss of fruit, vegetable and nut production, the research found. The lower consumption of these foods means about 1% of all deaths can now be attributed to pollinator loss, the scientists said. The researchers considered deaths from heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and some cancers, all of which can be reduced with healthier diets. The study is the first to quantify the human health toll of insufficient wild pollinators. The study was based on data from hundreds of farms across the world, information on yields and diet-related health risks and a computer model that tracks the global trade in food. “A critical missing piece in the biodiversity discussion has been a lack of direct linkages to human health,” said Dr Samuel Myers, at Harvard University’s TH Chan School of Public Health and senior author of the study. “This research establishes that loss of pollinators is already impacting health on a scale with other global health risk factors, such as prostate cancer or substance use disorders.” “But there is a solution out there in pollinator-friendly practices,” Myers said. These include increasing flower abundance on farms, cutting pesticide use, especially neonicotinoids, and preserving or restoring nearby natural habitats. “When these have been studied, they pay for themselves economically through increased production.” Nonetheless, the researchers said “immense challenges remain” in restoring pollinator populations globally. The study, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, assessed dozens of pollinator-dependent crops using data from the global farm study. It found that insufficient pollination was responsible for about a quarter of the difference between high and low yields. The farm data was used to determine the drop in yield due to too few pollinators. “We estimated that the world is currently losing 4.7% of total production of fruit, 3.2% of vegetables, and 4.7% nuts,” the researchers said. They then used an economic model to track how these losses would affect the diets of people across the globe. Finally, they used well-known data on how reductions of fruit, vegetables, legumes and nuts affect health to estimate the number of early deaths. The researchers found the biggest impact was in middle-income countries, like China, India, Russia and Indonesia, where heart disease, strokes and cancers were already prevalent due to poor diets, smoking, and low levels of exercise. In rich nations, more people could still afford to eat healthily even if the price of the foods went up due to lower production, although the poorer people in those countries would still suffer. Previous work by the team showed that most of the effects on health in a country were due to loss of pollinators in that country, rather than in other countries from which food was imported. The biggest drops in yield caused by insufficient wild pollinators were in low income countries. Food production there would benefit most from better wild pollination, but people’s health suffered less due to lower existing rates of heart disease and stroke. The estimated number of deaths is conservative, the scientists said, as the study did not include the impact of the reduction of micronutrients such as vitamin A and folate in diets, or the health impact of lost income for farmers. Prof David Goulson, at the University of Sussex, in the UK, who was not part of the study team, said: “Globally, we consume too much of the wind pollinated crops – wheat, rice, corn, barley – which are rich in carbs but relatively low in nutrients, leading to an epidemic of obesity and diabetes around the world. We do not eat enough fruit and veg, most of which requires insects for pollination – think apples, cherries, strawberries, squash, beans, tomatoes etc.” Goulson said that declines in other insects, such as predators of crop pests, would also cut yields. Furthermore, poor health, lost work and disability due to poorer diets would also have large impacts on health services and economies, adding: “The overall impacts of declining biodiversity on crop production are likely to be far larger than measured in this study. “The most concerning aspect of this study is that, since insect populations are continuing to decline, this lost crop yield is going to get worse into the future, while the human population is going to continue growing to at least 10 billion,” Goulson said. “The problems described here are likely to get much worse as the 21st century progresses.” Myers said: “We’re transforming every one of the natural systems on the planet and we keep experiencing these surprises. For example, our earlier work showed how rising carbon dioxide levels are making our food less nutritious. So this pollinator study is important, not only for its own sake, but as an indication that there’s risk in completely transforming our natural life support systems.” https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ly-deaths-a-year-study?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
people here on ET were bitching about wild seed budgeting for highway systems to increase bee populations because they're idiots that way.
I disagree that climate change is the biggest long-term challenge, but 'ecological overshoot' would just start a bunch of head scratching... Report warns the cost-of-living crisis may overshadow climate change World Jan 11, 2023 3:55 PM EST LONDON (AP) — Climate change is the global economy’s biggest long-term challenge but one the world is least prepared to tackle because of short-term problems led by a cost-of-living crisis, the World Economic Forum said in a report Wednesday. The group’s Global Risks Report, released ahead of its annual gathering of government leaders and business elites next week in the Swiss Alpine resort of Davos, offers a bleak outlook. The report based on a survey of 1,200 risk experts, industry bosses and policymakers says the biggest challenges over the next decade involve the environment, yet more immediate challenges are distracting world leaders, some of whom will be in Davos for panel discussions and schmoozing at an event that has faced criticism for not producing concrete action. “The coming years will present tough trade-offs for governments facing competing concerns for society, the environment and security,” according to the report co-authored with global insurance broker Marsh McLennan and Zurich Insurance Group. “A failure to mitigate climate change is ranked as one of the most severe threats in the short term but is the global risk we are seen to be the least prepared for,” the report said. Out of the top 10 long-term challenges, respondents said the top four are climate related: failure to limit or adapt to climate change; natural disasters and extreme weather; biodiversity loss; and ecosystem collapse. Short-term risks are testing pledges to reach net zero emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide and “have exposed a gap between what is scientifically necessary and politically palatable,” the report said. “We need to be better at balancing the short-term outlook of risk with the long-term outlook of risk,” said Carolina Klint, risk management leader at Marsh, “and we need to make decisions now that might feel counterintuitive because they might be a little bit costly upfront, but it’s just unavoidable.” One example is the big investment needed to speed up the transition away from fossil fuels to sustainable energy, Klint said. Top of the list of challenges over the next two years is a cost-of-living crisis sparked by the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war in Ukraine, which has sent food and energy prices soaring, squeezing household finances worldwide. Other aftershocks set off by the pandemic and the war have signaled a new and gloomier era for the global economy. Governments and central banks face the dilemma of reining in inflation by hiking interest rates, which runs the risk of sparking recession, or spending money to shield people from its worst effects, which could add to already-high public debt levels. The report also said deglobalization is increasingly in vogue. The war in Ukraine highlighted Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and natural gas while microchip shortages sparked by pandemic restrictions spotlighted the prevalence of semiconductor manufacturing in Asia. “Economic warfare is becoming the norm,” the report said. Tensions will rise as global powers use economic policies defensively to reduce reliance on rivals and offensively to limit the rise of competing nations. On top of that, society is increasingly polarized. Economic and social divisions are turning into political ones with people far apart on immigration, gender, reproductive rights, religion, climate and more — contributing to the decline of democracies. A big factor is misinformation and disinformation from political influencers spreading extreme beliefs and swaying elections Another growing risk is cybercrime and cyber insecurity stemming from increasingly connected public services such as transport, financial and water systems, which leaves them vulnerable to online disruptions and attacks. The race to develop new technologies in areas like artificial intelligence, quantum computing and biotechnology will offer partial solutions to some crises, the report said, but it also could widen inequality because poorer countries can’t afford them. “The resulting new economic era may be one of growing divergence between rich and poor countries,” the report said, “and the first rollback in human development in decades.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/...f-living-crisis-may-overshadow-climate-change
January 17, 2023 Eating one wild fish same as month of drinking tainted water: study by Daniel Lawler Locally caught fish in rivers and lakes could be a major source of exposure to "forever chemicals" PFAS, new research has warned. Eating one freshwater fish caught in a river or lake in the United States is the equivalent of drinking a month's worth of water contaminated with toxic "forever chemicals", new research said on Tuesday. The invisible chemicals called PFAS were first developed in the 1940s to resist water and heat, and are now used in items such as non-stick pans, textiles, fire suppression foams and food packaging. But the indestructibility of PFAS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, means the pollutants have built up over time in the air, soil, lakes, rivers, food, drinking water and even our bodies. There have been growing calls for stricter regulation for PFAS, which have been linked to a range of serious health issues including liver damage, high cholesterol, reduced immune responses and several kinds of cancer. To find out PFAS contamination in locally caught fish, a team of researchers analyzed more than 500 samples from rivers and lakes across the United States between 2013 and 2015. The median level of PFAS in the fish was 9,500 nanogrammes per kilogram, according to a new study published in the journal Environmental Research. Nearly three quarters of the detected "forever chemicals" was PFOS, one of the most common and hazardous of the thousands of PFAS. Eating just one freshwater fish equalled drinking water with PFOS at 48 parts per trillion for a month, the researchers calculated. Last year the US Environmental Protection Agency lowered the level of PFOS in drinking water it considers safe to 0.02 parts per trillion. The total PFAS level in the freshwater fish was 278 times higher than what has been found in commercially sold fish, the study said. Non-stick pans are among the products that use PFAS, which have been linked to a range of serious health issues. 'Greatest chemical threat' David Andrews, a senior scientist at the non-profit Environmental Working Group which led research, told AFP he grew up catching and eating fish. "I can no longer look at a fish without thinking about PFAS contamination," said Andrews, one of the study's authors. The findings were "particularly concerning due to the impact on disadvantaged communities that consume fish as a source protein or for social or cultural reasons," he added. "This research makes me incredibly angry because companies that made and used PFAS contaminated the globe and have not been held responsible." Patrick Byrne, an environmental pollution researcher at the UK's Liverpool John Moores University not involved in the research, said PFAS are "probably the greatest chemical threat the human race is facing in the 21st century". "This study is important because it provides the first evidence for widespread transfer of PFAS directly from fish to humans," he told AFP. Andrews called for much more stringent regulation to bring an end to all non-essential uses of PFAS. The study comes after Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden submitted a proposal to ban PFAS to the EU's European Chemicals Agency on Friday. The proposal, "one of the broadest in the EU's history," comes after the five countries found that PFAS were not adequately controlled, and bloc-wide regulation was needed, the agency said in a statement. More information: Nadia Barbo et al, Locally caught freshwater fish across the United States are likely a significant source of exposure to PFOS and other perfluorinated compounds, Environmental Research (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.115165 https://phys.org/news/2023-01-wild-fish-month-tainted.html
Great point. Makes you wonder what kids are learning in school these days. Kisin touches on this very point in his rant.