As heat records fall, how hot is too hot for the human body?

Extreme heat has been breaking records across Europe, Asia and North America, with millions of people sweltering in heat and humidity well above “normal” for days on end.

Death Valley hit a temperature of 128 degrees Fahrenheit (53.3 degrees Celsius) on July 16, 2023 – not quite the world’s hottest day on record, but close. Phoenix broke a record heat streak with 19 straight days with temperatures above 110 F (43.3 C), and had more in the forecast, accompanied by several nights that never got below 90 F (32.2 C). Globally, Earth likely had its hottest week on modern record in early July.

Heat waves are becoming supercharged as the climate changes – lasting longer, becoming more frequent and getting just plain hotter.

One question a lot of people are asking is: “When will it get too hot for normal daily activity as we know it, even for young, healthy adults?”



The answer goes beyond the temperature you see on the thermometer. It’s also about humidity. Our research is designed to come up with the combination of the two, measured as “wet-bulb temperature.” Together, heat and humidity put people at greatly increased risk, and the combination gets dangerous at lower levels than scientists previously believed.


file-20230719-15-92axgr.jpg

Long-term exposure to high heat can become lethal. Mark Wilson/Getty Images



The limits of human adaptability​

Scientists and other observers have become alarmed about the increasing frequency of extreme heat paired with high humidity.

People often point to a study published in 2010 that theorized that a wet-bulb temperature of 95 F (35 C) – equal to a temperature of 95 F at 100% humidity, or 115 F at 50% humidity – would be the upper limit of safety, beyond which the human body can no longer cool itself by evaporating sweat from the surface of the body to maintain a stable body core temperature.

It was not until recently that this limit was tested on humans in laboratory settings. The results of these tests show an even greater cause for concern.

The PSU H.E.A.T. Project​

To answer the question of “how hot is too hot?” we brought young, healthy men and women into the Noll Laboratory at Penn State University to experience heat stress in a controlled environmental chamber.

These experiments provide insight into which combinations of temperature and humidity begin to become harmful for even the healthiest humans.


file-20220624-17-za2vp8.jpg

S. Tony Wolf, a postdoctoral researcher in kinesiology at Penn State and coauthor of this article, conducts a heat test in the Noll Laboratory as part of the PSU Human Environmental Age Thresholds project. Patrick Mansell/Penn State, CC BY-NC-ND



Each participant swallowed a small telemetry pill that continuously monitored their deep body or core temperature. They then sat in an environmental chamber, moving just enough to simulate the minimal activities of daily living, such as showering, cooking and eating. Researchers slowly increased either the temperature in the chamber or the humidity in hundreds of separate experiments and monitored when the subject’s core temperature started to rise.

That combination of temperature and humidity at which the person’s core temperature starts to continuously rise is called the “critical environmental limit.”

Below those limits, the body is able to maintain a relatively stable core temperature over long periods of time. Above those limits, core temperature rises continuously and the risk of heat-related illnesses with prolonged exposures is increased.

When the body overheats, the heart has to work harder to pump blood flow to the skin to dissipate the heat, and when you’re also sweating, that decreases body fluids. In the direst case, prolonged exposure can result in heat stroke, a life-threatening problem that requires immediate and rapid cooling and medical treatment.



Our studies on young healthy men and women show that this upper environmental limit is even lower than the theorized 35 C. It occurs at a wet-bulb temperature of about 87 F (31 C) across a range of environments above 50% relative humidity. That would equal 87 F at 100% humidity or 100 F (38 C) at 60% humidity.


file-20220624-14-jt7lbq.png

Similar to the National Weather Service’s heat index chart, this chart translates combinations of air temperature and relative humidity into critical environmental limits, above which core body temperature rises. The border between the yellow and red areas represents the average critical environmental limit for young men and women at minimal activity. W. Larry Kenney, CC BY-ND



Dry vs. humid environments​

Current heat waves around the globe are exceeding those critical environmental limits, and approaching, if not exceeding, even the theorized 95 F (35 C) wet-bulb limits.

In the Middle East, Asaluyeh, Iran, recorded an extremely dangerous maximum wet-bulb temperature of 92.7 F (33.7 C) on July 16, 2023. India and Pakistan have both reached hazardous levels in recent years, as well.

In hot, dry environments, the critical environmental limits aren’t defined by wet-bulb temperatures, because almost all the sweat the body produces evaporates, which cools the body. However, the amount humans can sweat is limited, and we also gain more heat from the higher air temperatures.

Keep in mind that these cutoffs are based solely on keeping your body temperature from rising excessively. Even lower temperatures and humidity can place stress on the heart and other body systems.

A recent paper from our laboratory showed that heart rate begins to increase well before our core temperature does, as we pump blood to the skin. And while eclipsing these limits does not necessarily present a worst-case scenario, prolonged exposure may become dire for vulnerable populations such as the elderly and those with chronic diseases.

Our experimental focus has now turned to testing older men and women, since even healthy aging makes people less heat-tolerant. The increased prevalence of heart disease, respiratory problems and other health problems, as well as certain medications, can put them at even higher risk of harm. People over the age of 65 comprise some 80% to 90% of heat wave casualties.



How to stay safe​

Staying well hydrated and seeking areas in which to cool down – even for short periods – are important in high heat.

While more cities in the United States are expanding cooling centers to help people escape the heat, there will still be many people who will experience these dangerous conditions with no way to cool themselves.


The lead author of this article, W. Larry Kenney, discusses the impact of heat stress on human health with PBS NewsHour.

Even those with access to air conditioning might not turn it on because of the high cost of energy – a common occurrence in Phoenix – or because of large-scale power outages during heat waves or wildfires, as is becoming more common in the western U.S.

All told, the evidence continues to mount that climate change is not just a problem for the future. It is one that humanity is currently facing and must tackle head-on.

This article was first published on The Conversation, and was written by W. Larry Kenney, Professor of Physiology, Kinesiology and Human Performance, Penn State, Daniel Vecellio, Geographer-climatologist and Postdoctoral Fellow, Penn State, Rachel Cottle, Ph.D. Candidate in Exercise Physiology, Penn State, S. Tony Wolf, Postdoctoral Researcher in Kinesiology, Penn State

 
Sponsored
I love it when someone quotes me! It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

You lost all credibility with me when you said you've never heard of Judith Curry. What kind of scientist are you? An animal behaviourist perhaps. Anyone even vaguely connected with climate science knows who she is, because, although now retired, she's a strident opponent of anthropogenic climate change. She's been vilified by all the virtue signalling, rent seeking fools such as Al Gore and the Moore idiot whose first name I've happily forgotten. Judith's one of those rare people who can have an opinion, do more research, and realise that her original ideas aren't accurate. Until eight years ago, I swallowed the AGW Koolaid as well. No longer.

I'm equally as qualified as you, if not more so, to discuss the effects of heat on the body. It was part of my job description. Having lived and travelled over most of Australia, it's always been my experience that almost all areas with high summer humidity, rarely get past 35°. Conversely, those areas experiencing 45° temperatures are inland areas where the humidity is low. You can't have it both ways.

In conclusion, the only possible way you can conflate Ian Plimer with physiology, because I certainly didn't, is to believe that he's telling people how they should feel in the heat based on his geological research and expertise. As far as I know, he never has. Your final sentence has me completely baffled. What are Ian Plimer's views on AGW? You adopt a patronising tone to disrespect his views on AGW, but fail to say what they are.
"..it's always been my experience that almost all areas with high summer humidity, rarely get past 35°. Conversely, those areas experiencing 45° temperatures are inland areas where the humidity is low."

The key issue to surviving comfortably at temperature of 30-50 degree C is quite simply the ability to have one's sweat evaporate so as to keep one's body temperature in the healthily habitable range, int the 33.5 to 36.9 range. At those high temperatures that depends on the humidity. Average global temperature has risen since the industrial revolution began, as documented by NASA and there is plenty of good science behind that work.

My impression of hearing Ian Plimer speak about AGW is that he is quite happy that it is normal and that the beasts and the birds have survived worse, given a geological rate of change of global climate for hotter or colder. I have no problem with the notion of adaptation through a geological time-span. The problem is that our exponential increase in population is correlatable with the exponentially increased production of CO2 and the increase in our burning of fossil fuels.The consequent average global temperature change has occurred predominantly since 1945 and that is not a normal gradual geological rate of change. And there lies the problem in a world overcrowded by 8 billion people not frightened to kill each other when the going gets tough ,such as the Himalayan glaciers melting at an increasing rate that will ultimately cause water shortages for around 2 to possibly 3 billion people.

As for the hot bits and cool bits of Australia; at present they tend to be related to proximity to the sea and winds from the sea to put it simply.
 
"..it's always been my experience that almost all areas with high summer humidity, rarely get past 35°. Conversely, those areas experiencing 45° temperatures are inland areas where the humidity is low."

The key issue to surviving comfortably at temperature of 30-50 degree C is quite simply the ability to have one's sweat evaporate so as to keep one's body temperature in the healthily habitable range, int the 33.5 to 36.9 range. At those high temperatures that depends on the humidity. Average global temperature has risen since the industrial revolution began, as documented by NASA and there is plenty of good science behind that work.

My impression of hearing Ian Plimer speak about AGW is that he is quite happy that it is normal and that the beasts and the birds have survived worse, given a geological rate of change of global climate for hotter or colder. I have no problem with the notion of adaptation through a geological time-span. The problem is that our exponential increase in population is correlatable with the exponentially increased production of CO2 and the increase in our burning of fossil fuels.The consequent average global temperature change has occurred predominantly since 1945 and that is not a normal gradual geological rate of change. And there lies the problem in a world overcrowded by 8 billion people not frightened to kill each other when the going gets tough ,such as the Himalayan glaciers melting at an increasing rate that will ultimately cause water shortages for around 2 to possibly 3 billion people.

As for the hot bits and cool bits of Australia; at present they tend to be related to proximity to the sea and winds from the sea to put it simply.
Thank you for a reasoned, courteous response.

I'm an avowed naturist. Not as in undressing in public, but in loving and trusting Mother Nature. It probably sounds immature and fanciful to you, but in my 78 years on the planet, I've run the gamut of 'what's it all about', and this theory is the one I'm most comfortable with.

I don't think geological findings can be dismissed out of hand. There are points made by climate change believers that appear to be reasonable. While I don't blindly believe anything I'm told these days, I can see how these these things make sense to someone who wants to believe them. But we're all more inclined to believe things that reinforce existing beliefs aren't we?
 
Thank you for a reasoned, courteous response.

I'm an avowed naturist. Not as in undressing in public, but in loving and trusting Mother Nature. It probably sounds immature and fanciful to you, but in my 78 years on the planet, I've run the gamut of 'what's it all about', and this theory is the one I'm most comfortable with.

I don't think geological findings can be dismissed out of hand. There are points made by climate change believers that appear to be reasonable. While I don't blindly believe anything I'm told these days, I can see how these these things make sense to someone who wants to believe them. But we're all more inclined to believe things that reinforce existing beliefs aren't we?
As a professional geologist of many years from about half a century ago, I certainly trust Mother Nature. That is what frightens me about our collective human behaviour in burning stuff for energy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joydie
Prof Sloane is an Economist. Economists are not scientists although they may carry out social experiments through promulgating their ideas via politicians. The behavior of CO2 and some other "greenhouse" gases does not answer to economists' ideas but, in the case of CO2, was demonstrated in 1827, 3 years after its discovery. Again in 1859 or thenabouts; and the global influence of atmospheric CO2 was modelled quite reasonably in 1894-96. As at that time we didn't have 8 billion people driving massive hydrocarbon-burning industries, those scientific findings didn't seem to be of much concern' apart from being of use to gardeners.
 
I will listen to people like Professor Sloane. May I ask what your credentials are?
You are welcome to listen to whomsoever you wish. As for my credentials; my publications are too scientific for The Australian.
 

Join the conversation

News, deals, games, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.

Seniors Discount Club

The SDC searches for the best deals, discounts, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.
  1. New members
  2. Jokes & fun
  3. Photography
  4. Nostalgia / Yesterday's Australia
  5. Food and Lifestyle
  6. Money Saving Hacks
  7. Offtopic / Everything else

Latest Articles

  • We believe that retirement should be a time to relax and enjoy life, not worry about money. That's why we're here to help our members make the most of their retirement years. If you're over 60 and looking for ways to save money, connect with others, and have a laugh, we’d love to have you aboard.
  • Advertise with us

User Menu

Enjoyed Reading our Story?

  • Share this forum to your loved ones.
Change Weather Postcode×
Change Petrol Postcode×