Posted by
Catmman on Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:00:50 PM
I've asked this several times before, "Is there ANYTHING which ISN'T caused by 'global warming'?"
I guess I could qualify my question by asking, "Is there anything GOOD which 'global warming' causes?"
People will develop more kidney stones in a hotter climate, because the heat tends to make us dehydrated and that causes the stones to form, two Texas urologists say.
Drs. Margaret Peale and Yair Lotan of the University of Texas say there's already a "kidney stone belt" in the hot, humid U.S. southeast, stretching from Louisiana to Florida and north to Tennessee.
Well Mr. Osborne, it may not be kidney stones after all.
Ahhh, the old correlation/causation argument. A handy standby for the AGW crowd. Someone moves to a hotter climate area and the chance for developing kidney stones goes up. It MUST be becasue of the higher temps! I guess the logic used by the docs couldn't be turned around by asking a simple question: "When people move to hotter climates, don't they TEND to drink MORE fluids/water?" If they are in a hotter area, especially when they aren't used to an increase in tempertures, people do drink more water. Wouldn't this help to keep kidney stones from forming?
I do agree that people tend to get more dehydrated in a hotter climate. But people also tend to drink more water/fluids to compensate for this.
And the story calls kidney stones a "common ailment". Well is it "common" or is it caused by global warming? If kidney stones are "common" that would suppose people have suffered from kidney stones at all times and in all locations over the world throughout history - even when the "globe" was cool.
I grew up and have lived a majority of my life in "hot" locales - west/south central Texas. I have also spent times in several locales throughout the world - Panama, the Philippines and the Middle East. I have also suffered from a disease - hyperparathyroidsism - which causes an increase in the amount of calcium (mineral salts) in the blood (and resultant kidney stones). I've never had a kidney stone.
Why no mention in the article about a persons eating habits? The quality fo the water supply in various locations ("hard" water as opposed to "soft")?
Why? Because the article is written by a person with pre-conceived notions of the general topic, using information taken by possibly biased doctors assuming a future outcome - that's why. Just read the article! It is unbalanced and biased towards alarmism, pure and simple.