Since people are part of the biosphere, I am posting the following sad news here:
Adam Isen et al. (2017), "Relationship between season of birth, temperature exposure, and later life wellbeing", PNAS, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1702436114
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/11/28/1702436114.abstract
Abstract: "We study how exposure to extreme temperatures in early periods of child development is related to adult economic outcomes measured 30 y later. Our analysis uses administrative earnings records for over 12 million individuals born in the United States between 1969 and 1977, linked to fine-scale, daily weather data and location and date of birth. We calculate the length of time each individual is exposed to different temperatures in utero and in early childhood, and we estimate flexible regression models that allow for nonlinearities in the relationship between temperature and long-run outcomes. We find that an extra day with mean temperatures above 32 °C in utero and in the first year after birth is associated with a 0.1% reduction in adult annual earnings at age 30. Temperature sensitivity is evident in multiple periods of early development, ranging from the first trimester of gestation to age 6–12 mo. We observe that household air-conditioning adoption, which increased dramatically over the time period studied, mitigates nearly all of the estimated temperature sensitivity."
See also the related article:
Title: "Climate Change Might Lower Salaries"
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/12/hot-weather-fetuses/547406/
Extract: "The more 90-degree days a fetus or infant endured, the lower his or her earnings in adulthood."
a vast amount of differences in so many fields like mentality, sun-hours, economic conditions, availability of water etc etc. is so huge that even though the fact my be a fact indeed, it's totally unclear whether:
- one of the many other factors present in warm climate places ( with more hot days logically)
. is/are responsible for the said outcome.
- higher temps reduce the overall economical conditions due to more "siesta" like time etc.
. less need for winter storage etc. that would make excessive work less necessary to survive etc.
- general conditions present in warm places is responsible for the smaller average income or if
. what the article suggests is responsible for the general economical and environmental conditions.
what's the cause and what's the result, not that sure while either way the fact remains that people from warmer places who then as a result are exposed to more high temperature exposure as a fetus and/or early childhood earn less the warmer the climate is.
i'm a swiss citizen grown up and working in CH D, PRC, U.S., CND and many other countries in different climate zones before retirement and now living in souther spain and can easily tell that there indeed exists an at times huge difference of income and life style between the people living in countries situated up north and down south where temps are cooler, where winters are colder and longer etc. and i believe that it's the influence of natural conditions, clothing, hours spent outside houses, chances of having a good life without spending money or too much of it, vegetation and it's fruits etc. rather than the exposer to temps themselves. that may as well be a logical coincidence with all other factores, menionend or not mentioned above.
life conditions in parat help form the personality and that again plays a big role n eagerness and need to work and make (more) money.
further there are very cold places where the income drops significantly against people living in places with moderate temps and temp extremes due to other factors like difficulty to move ouside in winter, trouble to be highly productive (efficient) lack of light and reduced vegetation (growth)
i'm quite certain that the same study for temps below -30C exposure as fetus and early chilldhood would procude a simiilar or even worse result.
hence, fact remains but the sugggested cause is not the or at least not the only and or main cause.