Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

If CO2 is bad for your health according to the EPA...?

If CO2 is bad for your health according to the EPA then shouldn't CPR be made illegal? You are blowing your CO2 directly in the person`s lungs. Wouldn't that be dangerous to your health?

Update:

Princess Athena: My point exactly. Plus plants require CO2 to live

Update 2:

Unhappy: We`ll probably be hit with an Exhalation fee, its not a tax though, its a fee. Obama wouldnt raise taxes

Update 3:

Ben and KLF: Wouldnt exhaling directly into a persons mouth and lungs cause the CO2 to be "concentrated" You`re lungs are only so big and 2 large breaths required in CPR would cause that concentration to occur, yet CPR is effective.

Update 4:

Dent: Its the 21st century American dream...get rich through a lawsuit.

Update 5:

Ottawa: Expect to be hit with fees for that

Update 6:

Sailor: Or you can just exhale into someone else`s lungs while doing CPR, pretty sure it`ll have a similar effect, if CO2 is that hazardous to your health

14 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    If CO2 was bad for our health, then why are we still living ?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I have been researching this error in logic for almost 50 years and I have become fairly certain the liberals who first promoted this mistake back around the civil war really meant so2 which is deadly. The problem is that when real scientists were brought into the question they all said co2 is no problem and it is critical for the health of humans, animals and all plant life. The more mentally restricted liberals seized on the fact that all life on the planet is dependent in some way on co2 to declare it as hazardous to the environment. Why, because the central part of the entire liberal agenda is to reduce the worlds population and intelligence back to where it was prior to the incorporation of the more intelligent Celtic culture which they tried to destroy but failed to.

    Some scientific information revealing the truth about global warming, when it happened and what probably caused it. And as well how many years, centuries or millennia it might be before the world warms up again from the coming ice age.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:0Master_Past_200...

    http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/global_warming.h...

    http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data....

    http://reasonmclucus.tripod.com/CO2myth.html

    http://mc-computing.com/qs/Global_Warming/Atmosphe...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation

    Where the heat came from and why it was abnormally cold previously

    http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~dbunny/research/global/215....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_minimum

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

  • 1 decade ago

    This "bad for your health" angle is just the new fall-back position in case too many people find out that they were making the whole global warming thing up. They will excuse the climategate emails by saying they lied about global warming to save lives

  • 1 decade ago

    Well CO2 is potentially deadly but your expelled breath still contains oxygen which the body needs to function. As for the EPA classification, well I'd say a noble idea but best left as such as it is a natural component of the atmosphere and even essential. I imagine that they made this fool-hardy move to try encourage people to be proactive in reducing their carbon footprint.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Feces is likewise a risk, possibly they're going to tax it sluggish interior the thrown room as properly? considering the fact that this may well be a tax on what you exhale, next comes what you excrete. communicate a pair of catch-all. greater is coming, trash, sea water, airborne dirt and mud, All undesirable for you if ingested/inhaled. tax tax tax, administration administration administration, from Josey Wales ... "Doing perfect aint have been given no end." Neither does this insane crap as long as human beings proceed to be gullible sheep.

  • 1 decade ago

    Take a bottle of CO2 blow it in a bag and put your head in it. After a few minutes take your head out and tell us how good it is for you. Ha ha ha ha

  • Nata T
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    CO2 at 50,000 ppm is very bad for humans, at 500 ppm its fine. We'd have to see a 50 fold increase before CO2 would be deadly.

  • Trevor
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    It all depends on the concentrations of the gases in question.

    Almost four fifths of our atmosphere is nitrogen, in itself harmless, if the atmosphere were pure nitrogen we'd all be dead.

    In terms of human breathing it's the amount of oxygen and CO2 which is important. We don't exhale pure carbon dioxide. 79% of what we breathe out is nitrogen, 16% is oxygen and 5% is carbon dioxide. At these concentrations the air is still quite breathable.

    Did you know: All the atmosphere surrounding the planet has been breathed in and out by humans seven times already. Because of the way air disperses, your breathing contains air that at some point was breathed by Lincoln, Hitler, Presley... everyone, ever.

  • Ben O
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    In concentrations around 10 times the existing level, it would be hazardous.

  • 1 decade ago

    What's scary is that each and every one of us is now a full-time polluter. It doesn't matter if you live in the forest, make your own clothes and eat grass, you are a polluter, full time, all day, every day, for life.

    But don't worry, I'm sure it won't be a problem.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.