Increase In Mental Disorders Now Blamed On ‘Climate Change’

Written by Dr. Matthew Wielicki on April 9, 2024. Posted in Current News

The discourse on the relationship between ‘climate change’ and mental health has been rapidly evolving. Recent studies have suggested a link between the ‘progression’ of ‘climate change’ and an increase in the incidence of early developmental psychiatric disorders

The research ventures into the intricate domain of epigenetics, positing that prenatal stress due to ‘extreme’ weather events could potentially predispose unborn children to heightened risks of disorders such as anxiety, depression, ADHD, and conduct disorder.

The findings suggest staggering increases in risk for these conditions, painting a dire picture of the ‘climate crisis’ effect on even the unborn.

This article critically examines these findings, contrasting them with empirical climate data that indicates no significant increase in extreme weather events, such as hurricanes making landfall in the United States, to question the strength of the claimed correlation.

Prenatal stress undeniably carries the potential for profound impacts on fetal development, with a growing body of evidence underscoring its adverse effects.

Studies consistently show that heightened stress levels during pregnancy can affect the baby, potentially leading to a range of outcomes such as low birth weight, premature birth, and developmental and behavioral disorders later in life.

For instance, elevated maternal cortisol — often referred to as the ‘stress hormone’ — is associated with changes in the intrauterine environment that can influence the fetal brain’s development.

Such insights have vital implications for healthcare and support services, emphasizing the need for stress-reduction interventions and social support systems to mitigate these risks during pregnancy.

However, linking such disorders to ‘climate change’ is dubious as this would imply a rise in events such as Hurricane Sandy used in the study above.

Contrary to the grim depiction in the study, long-term meteorological data, including the frequency and intensity of hurricanes making landfall in the United States, does not exhibit an upward trend.

The recent charting of landfalling hurricanes from 1900 to 2023, for instance, contradicts the notion that such extreme weather events are becoming more common. This disconnect between the proposed increase in psychiatric disorders and the static frequency of weather events calls into question the direct causality suggested by the research.

Furthermore, comparing the incidence of early developmental psychiatric disorders between the Western and developing world, one could only conclude that mothers in the developing world have less stressful pregnancies.

For instance, in the Western world, the reported prevalence of childhood psychiatric disorders such as autism spectrum disorders can be as high as 1 in 54 children according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In contrast, reported rates in the developing world appear lower, possibly influenced by underdiagnosis due to less developed healthcare systems. Studies suggest significantly lower reported rates of autism in Africa and South Asia; however, researchers attribute some of this to a lack of structured clinical assessment and diagnostic facilities.

Additionally, ADHD prevalence rates are estimated at around 5.3 percent globally, with considerable variability: the United States reports rates nearing 9.4 percent in children aged 2-17, according to the CDC, while data from the World Health Organization indicates lower rates in the developing regions.

This disparity highlights not just the complexities of healthcare and diagnosis but also raises questions about the impact of environmental stressors and the methodology used to assess their effects across different socioeconomic and cultural contexts.

The phenomenon of overdiagnosis in the realm of early developmental psychiatric disorders in Western societies, and particularly in the USA, raises critical questions about the underlying factors contributing to such statistics.

In the United States, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been revised to encompass a broader spectrum of symptoms, a change which some argue has inadvertently pathologized normal behavioral variations, leading to higher rates of diagnosis.

For example, the prevalence of ADHD diagnoses has increased markedly over the past few decades, with the CDC reporting a rise from 7.8 percent in 2003 to 9.4 percent in 2017 among American children.

This uptick has sparked debate among healthcare professionals, with some pointing to increased awareness and better diagnostic practices, while others contend that it reflects a trend toward overdiagnosis, possibly driven by educational pressures, cultural expectations, and even the pharmaceutical industry’s influence.

In this contentious landscape, linking the rise in developmental disorders directly to ‘climate change’ is a particularly tenuous proposition.

While the stress of extreme weather events, as highlighted by studies on prenatal stress, could plausibly contribute to adverse developmental outcomes, the leap to attributing broad diagnostic trends to the (alleged – Ed) ‘climate crisis’ seems a stretch.

It discounts the multifaceted nature of psychiatric diagnosis, which is influenced by a complex interplay of biological, social, and psychological factors.

The assertion that ‘climate change’ is a significant driver of the increasing rates of psychiatric disorders in the West fails to consider these nuances and, as is the case with much of the climate debate, is reductive.

It obscures the need for a more granular examination of the myriad factors at play that may be more directly responsible for the observed trends in early developmental psychiatric diagnoses.

However, that is complex… so it’s easier to blame ‘climate change’ if you want to get published and funded.

See more here substack.com

Header image: First Cry Parenting

Bold emphasis added

Editor’s note: notice the highlighted words ‘suggested’, ‘could’, and ‘potentially’. In other words, this ‘study’ is nothing more than speculation, with little or no data to back it up.

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.