Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 211 posts

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#181

Post by kulahan »

mrguyorama wrote: post #175
kulahan wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you need to show that? I don't see anything that requires blood oxygen levels to be significantly different to get from "people at high elevation have access to less oxygen" to "living in lower-oxygen environments creates the right conditions to see serotonin go down and dopamine go up". Even if oxygen levels are identical once you get to the blood stream, it can cause many changes further up the process.

You are missing the fact that the human lungs are something like twice as effective and powerful as the "need" to be at sea level, and have plenty of room to handle less oxygen in the air. Second, the human body adapts quite well to living at higher altitudes, because it will compensate for the lower oxygen levels. Same blood oxygen level as a sea level human means same quantity of oxygen getting to the brain. >Even…

>What mechanism could possibly cause this? The brain is getting all the oxygen it needs.

I have no idea, but I was unaware this could only be caused by oxygen failing to reach the brain.

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#182

Post by kulahan »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #171
kulahan wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you need to show that? I don't see anything that requires blood oxygen levels to be significantly different to get from "people at high elevation have access to less oxygen" to "living in lower-oxygen environments creates the right conditions to see serotonin go down and dopamine go up". Even if oxygen levels are identical once you get to the blood stream, it can cause many changes further up the process.

You'd need to show it because for O2 levels to matter, it would need to be the O2 levels experienced by cells that are different. But because of the body's adaptive mechanisms, it is possible for cellular O2 availability to remain (relatively) constant despite living in a depleted O2 environment. Your cells cannot measure environmental O2 levels - only what is available from the bloodstream. Ergo, if sufficient adapt…

>Ergo, if sufficient adaptation has taken place - and it may not have

This tiny little caveat is the entire point of my comment. Happy to converse about other stuff, but it's a tangential topic at best.

>You'd need to show it because for O2 levels to matter, it would need to be the O2 levels experienced by cells that are different.

Right, and some of your body's cells are experiencing it differently. How... else would your body know to respond?

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#183

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

refulgentis wrote: post #172
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't measured my blood oxygen, alas. I've been here 4+ years now, and other than being 4 years older and just coming out of a sedentary 3 year period, I notice zero effects of living (and running, cycling, swimming, hiking) at altitude. Can't say any more than that really.

Hmmm, given that...it does seem to me the initial claim is likely to be true. I know you said that it has to vary between multiple individuals at altitude, but it's unclear to me why. Don't we just have to show some individuals don't ever get back up to the same blood oxygen levels?

Well, another comment here from a guy of Sammi ancestry notes potential polymorphism in GHC1 as possible (and likely) partial explanation.

I would imagine that there are a variety of potential genetic differences that could generate a wide range of altitude-adaptation differences.

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#184

Post by Scoundreller »

lp251 wrote: post #153
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For that to be true, you'd need to establish that blood oxygen levels differ significantly across altitude adapted individuals, and I don't believe that this is the case. Also, when I first moved from Philadelphia to a village in New Mexico at 6000', I remember reading that I should plan on a 3 phase adapative process that would take as much as 9 months to complete. This makes me give less weight to things like the 2…

Did you ever fully acclimate? After 3 years at 6000 ft I still had lower blood oxygen than at sea level. (per apple watch, so take that with a grain of salt)

Isn’t Apple Watch and other blood oxygenation just measuring saturation (a relative measure)?

Among other things, Acclimatization involves producing more blood-oxygen carrying capacity (or less if you go back to sea level), which is an absolute measure, not a relative one that the oximeters would pick up.

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#185

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

kulahan wrote: post #182
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd need to show it because for O2 levels to matter, it would need to be the O2 levels experienced by cells that are different. But because of the body's adaptive mechanisms, it is possible for cellular O2 availability to remain (relatively) constant despite living in a depleted O2 environment. Your cells cannot measure environmental O2 levels - only what is available from the bloodstream. Ergo, if sufficient adapt…

>Ergo, if sufficient adaptation has taken place - and it may not have This tiny little caveat is the entire point of my comment. Happy to converse about other stuff, but it's a tangential topic at best. >You'd need to show it because for O2 levels to matter, it would need to be the O2 levels experienced by cells that are different. Right, and some of your body's cells are experiencing it differently. How... else woul…

Suppose you had an internal combustion engine that functions well in 20.9% O2, but very poorly in 19.2% O2.

Then a mechanic shows up a lever you can pull that alters the way the engine intakes and processes O2. You move it a bit, and all of a sudden, the engine now functions just as well in 19.2% O2 as 20.9% O2.

Now imagine that the engine can measure its own performance, and can move the lever itself ...

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#186

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

mrguyorama wrote: post #176
JohnDeHope wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes me think. What if there was a database of conjectures. Each has an id number. The database could link to all sorts of media, scientific studies, etc. supporting or disputing each conjecture. Then you could just give the id number and folks would also get all the pro and con material they might like. Even things like "the earth is a sphere" could link to educational videos and whatnot. And even things like…

In the age of the internet, lack of knowledge about something is a choice. People who believe Obama is a lizard alien don't do so because they haven't seen the appropriate "educational" video, but because that's what confirms what they want to believe.

What about people who do (or do not) believe that socialism is the future of America?

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#187

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

kulahan wrote: post #182
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd need to show it because for O2 levels to matter, it would need to be the O2 levels experienced by cells that are different. But because of the body's adaptive mechanisms, it is possible for cellular O2 availability to remain (relatively) constant despite living in a depleted O2 environment. Your cells cannot measure environmental O2 levels - only what is available from the bloodstream. Ergo, if sufficient adapt…

>Ergo, if sufficient adaptation has taken place - and it may not have This tiny little caveat is the entire point of my comment. Happy to converse about other stuff, but it's a tangential topic at best. >You'd need to show it because for O2 levels to matter, it would need to be the O2 levels experienced by cells that are different. Right, and some of your body's cells are experiencing it differently. How... else woul…

> This tiny little caveat is the entire point of my comment. Happy to converse about other stuff, but it's a tangential topic at best.

Renshaw appears to be suggesting/hypothesizing that there is some universal "low O2" effect that leads to higher rates of suicide.

I'm saying that this seems unlikely, given that in fully adapted individuals, the cellular environment does not experience low O2.

Of course, in non-fully adapted individuals (either because they are still adapting, or because genetic/physiological factors prevent it), this would not be the case.

But that still says that there's no "general" low-O2 mechanism that is affecting anyone who lives at altitude. It only suggests that there maybe a low-O2 mechanism that affects some individuals. Whether there is a correlation between suicide rates and altitude adaptation doesn't appear to be easily established.

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#188

Post by Scoundreller »

boesboes wrote: post #102
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worse than urban air with auto pollution? I'd want to see a source for that...

Yeah, ppl on the ring road of Amsterdam live 10 years shorter afaik, for instance

Poor people live next to highways?

Or when we build the highway, we don’t raze the homes of the elite/wealthy/well-connected to do it, we do it in “bad neighbourhoods”

Or indirect effects: factories move/build next to the new highway (ease of moving materials+density of employees+ease of commuting because of the highway), contaminating the neighbourhood.

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#189

Post by scoofy »

lp251 wrote: post #153
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For that to be true, you'd need to establish that blood oxygen levels differ significantly across altitude adapted individuals, and I don't believe that this is the case. Also, when I first moved from Philadelphia to a village in New Mexico at 6000', I remember reading that I should plan on a 3 phase adapative process that would take as much as 9 months to complete. This makes me give less weight to things like the 2…

Did you ever fully acclimate? After 3 years at 6000 ft I still had lower blood oxygen than at sea level. (per apple watch, so take that with a grain of salt)

Yea, we would only need a small percentage of folks unable to acclimate to create a significant correlation.

Re: Positive association between altitude and suicide in U.S. counties

#190

Post by scoofy »

bwanab wrote: post #164

Mountains == isolation. I grew up in a mountainous region where the ridges separate the valleys. If your friend lived a mile away, it might take 20 miles of driving to get there because of the separation. I wonder if they've measured that people who are very isolated have more suicide?

The problem is that there are low altitude mountains. The argument here is that the suicide rate of Denver or Park City should be higher than folks living in the isolated mountains of Maine or Oregon.
Post reply on HN