Bigger hurricanes are now more damaging

US - The biggest and most damaging hurricanes are now three times more frequent than they were 100 years ago, say researchers. Using a new method of calculating the destruction, the scientists say the increase in frequency is “unequivocal”. Previous attempts to isolate the impact of climate change on hurricanes have often came up with conflicting results. But the new study says the increase in damage caused by these big cyclones is linked by global warming. Hurricanes or tropical cyclones are one of the most destructive natural disasters. The damage inflicted by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 was estimated to be $125bn, roughly 1% of US GDP. One of the big questions that scientists have wrestled with is how to compare storm events from different eras. Is the increase in financial damages recorded over the last century simply down to the fact there are now more people living in the paths of hurricanes, who are generally wealthier? Hurricane Irma caused extensive damage in Florida, but also in Antigua and Barbuda Previous research has concluded that the rise in damages was related to wealth, and not to any statistically significant change in frequency. Instead of looking at economic damage, the authors looked at the amount of land that was totally destroyed by more than 240 storms between 1900 and 2018, based on insurance industry databases. As an example, the researchers examined Hurricane Irma that hit Florida in 2017. Around 1.1 million people were living inside the 10,000 sq km closest to the storm’s landfall.
Hurricane Dorian sparked an emergency in Florida in September
With the wealth per capita estimated to be $194,000, the scientists concluded that the overall wealth in this 10,000 sq km region was $215bn.
As the storm caused $50bn worth of damage, this was 23% of the wealth in the region. Taking 23% of the 10,000 sq km gave an area of total destruction of 2,300 sq km.
By working out similar figures for events across the last century, the researchers were able to make what they say are more realistic comparisons in terms of damage over the decades.

Google accesses trove of US patient data

US - Google has gained access to a huge trove of US patient data - without the need to notify those patients - thanks to a deal with a major health firm. The scheme, dubbed Project Nightingale, was agreed with Ascension, which runs 2,600 hospitals. Google can access health records, names and addresses without telling patients, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news. The tech giant said this was “standard practice”. Among the data Google reportedly has access to under the deal are lab results, diagnoses, records of hospitalisation and dates of birth. Neither doctors nor patients need to be told that Google can see this information. The Wall Street Journal reports that data access began last year and was broadened over the summer. In a blog, Google said its work with Ascension would adhere to industry-wide regulations, such as the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). “To be clear... patient data cannot and will not be combined with any Google consumer data,” the firm added.
Ascension said the deal would help it to “optimise” patient care and would include the development of artificial intelligence (AI) tools to support doctors.
The company also said it would begin using Google’s cloud data storage service and business applications known as G Suite.
However, Project Nightingale has already attracted criticism from those who argue that it takes away patients’ control of their own data.
“There’s a massive issue that these public-private partnerships are all done under private contracts, so it’s quite difficult to get some transparency,” said Prof Jane Kaye at the University of Oxford.
“Google is saying they don’t link it to their other data but what they’re doing all the time is refining their algorithms, refining what they do and giving them[selves] market advantage.”
Health organisations are under increasing pressure to improve efficiency and quality of care. Many are turning to AI in an effort to sharpen their services, but such moves have sometimes faced criticism over how sensitive patient data is handled.
In the UK, Google’s AI-focused subsidiary DeepMind was found to have broken the law when it failed to explain properly to patients how their data would be used in the development of a kidney disease app.
The tool, called Streams, was designed to flag up patients at risk of developing acute kidney injury.