4.7 Article

Beating the heat: Development and evaluation of a Canadian hot weather health-response plan

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES
Volume 109, Issue 12, Pages 1241-1248

Publisher

US DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.011091241

Keywords

apparent temperature; Canada; heat index; heat-related mortality; heat stress; heat wave; hot weather; humidex; Toronto

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An increasing number of cities subject to hazardous summer weather in the United States and Canada have began to develop and implement hot weather response plans to prevent heat-related illnesses and deaths. In this study we focus on heat-mortality relationships in Toronto, Ontario, between 1980 and 1996 and evaluate the potential effectiveness of the city's interim hot weather-health response plan. Using two heat stress indexes-humidex and apparent temperature-we identified excess mortality associated with hot and humid weather and then estimated excess deaths for hot and cool summers. Mortality rates for all ages and for > 64 years age groups rose with increasing humidex and apparent temperature, with no significant increase for the population < 65 years. Excess mortality occurred as low as the 30-35°C humidex range, which is below the 40°C humidex used to issue a heat warning under Toronto's interim hot weather response Plan. During a hot summer (such as 1988 or 1995), 32 excess deaths would be expected, whereas 34 fewer deaths than baseline levels would be expected during a cool summer like 1982 or 1992. Days with high humidex levels occur infrequently in Toronto, and thus exposure is limited under i current climatic conditions. In the event of a warming climate, more days with dangerously high humidex levels are likely to occur, and summer deaths are expected to increase. Toronto's hot weather health-response plan is an important early step for adaptation to climate change.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available