Burning embers: synthesis of the health risks of climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Since 2001, a synthesizing element in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports has been a summary of how risks in a particular system could change with additional warming above pre-industrial levels, generally accompanied by a figure called the burning embers. We present a first effort to develop burning embers for climate change risks for heat-related morbidity and mortality, ozone-related mortality, malaria, diseases carried by Aedes sp., Lyme disease, and West Nile fever. We used an evidence-based approach to construct the embers based on a comprehensive global literature review. Projected risks for these health outcomes under 1.5 °C, 2 °C, and >2 °C of warming were used to estimate at what temperatures risk levels increased from undetectable to medium, high, and very high, from the pre-industrial baseline, under three adaptation scenarios. Recent climate change has likely increased risks from undetectable to moderate for heat-related morbidity and mortality, ozone-related mortality, dengue, and Lyme disease. Recent climate change also was assessed as likely beginning to affect the burden of West Nile fever. A detectable impact of climate change on malaria is not yet apparent but is expected to occur with additional warming. The risk for each climate-sensitive health outcome is projected to increase as global mean surface temperature increases above pre-industrial levels, with the extent and pace of adaptation expected to affect the timing and magnitude of risks. The embers may be an effective tool for informing efforts to build climate-resilient health systems including through vulnerability, capacity, and adaptation assessments and the development of national adaptation plans. The embers also can be used to raise awareness of future threats from climate change and advocate for mitigation actions to reduce the overall magnitude of health risks later this century and to expand current adaptation efforts to protect populations now.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".