131–140 of 211 posts
Would higher altitude not correlate with colder, gray, gloomier (highly scientific term) winters?
Regardless, high altitude cities like Denver, Salt Lake City, Reno or Boise are neither particularly cold or cloudy when compared to other US cities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would assume that higher altitudes would have more intense winters that then result in people staying indoors and isolated for longer periods of time? I would guess that altitude and longitude are not correlated globally (at least I don't know why they would be) but in the US I generally associate altitude with snow.
Countries like Finland and Iceland are consistently in the top 5 of happiest countries in the world. Of course that has many non-related reasons, but the effect of intense winters can't be too bad.
Would higher altitude not correlate with colder, gray, gloomier (highly scientific term) winters?
Colder, sure. If by gray/gloomier you mean cloud cover then I don't think so. Regardless, high altitude cities like Denver, Salt Lake City, Reno or Boise are neither particularly cold or cloudy when compared to other US cities.
I don't want to come of as flippant, but I'm genuinely curious: Is there a correlation to how many stories the person's residence has as well? If they live on a 3rd story of an apartment, is there a higher suicide rate than the first floor of an apartment?
I don't want to come of as flippant, but I'm genuinely curious: Is there a correlation to how many stories the person's residence has as well? If they live on a 3rd story of an apartment, is there a higher suicide rate than the first floor of an apartment?
High rises have their own associations with mental illness. I don’t know if anyone has ever looked at pure altitude as possible effect.
Would higher altitude not correlate with colder, gray, gloomier (highly scientific term) winters?
Colder, sure. If by gray/gloomier you mean cloud cover then I don't think so. Regardless, high altitude cities like Denver, Salt Lake City, Reno or Boise are neither particularly cold or cloudy when compared to other US cities.
“at high altitudes, atmospheric pressure is reduced, and oxygen is less available (commonly referred to as the air being “thinner”). This has a couple of effects on air quality for the people in the area. First, combustion engines perform less efficiently than they do at lower altitudes, causing an increase in emissions. Second, UV rays from the sun have a greater impact at high elevations, leading to an increase in photochemical smog, the result of airborne pollutants reacting with sunlight.” https://www.aprilaire.com/blog/altitude-and-healthy-air-air-...
This paper gets a lot of scrutiny, but it's been out for over a decade and hasn't been debunked or explained. I've been mulling over this one for awhile, and have had several conversations with reasonably informed individuals in related fields. There's a lot of theories, many of which are explored in the comment section here. If you strongly believe in a theory, I'd like to remind you that this is a line of inquiry that could have life saving implications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's another nitpick for you, Figure 1 is showing the independent variable (elevation) on the y-axis instead of the x-axis. And I don't know why they used a line plot instead of a proper histogram.
Why is elevation the independent variable?
I haven't dug into their controls, but it seems to me that higher altitude may be associated with remoteness.
Are Denver and SLC considered remote? My own city is about at sea level, but by car the next closest cities are 3 hours to the north, 6 hours to the east, and 9 hours to the south. I’d say we are more remote, despite being at a much lower elevation.