https://nypost.com/2023/12/19/news/humans-may-be-fueling-global-warming-by-breathing-new-study/

“Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming,” according to research released last week in the UK journal PLOS.

If it has not become clear to you yet, you are the carbon that they want to eliminate! Your mere existence is a problem for the climate religion. Humans are being compared to livestock, and our exhalations are now being linked to a threat to the rest of the planet. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/15/netherlands-announces-25bn-plan-to-radically-reduce-livestock-numbers

The Study can be found below.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0295157

“The highest reported proportion of MPs was found in African populations with up to 84% [15]. Proportions of MPs in Western populations vary from 25% [17] to 62% [18], while in Asian populations (such as Japanese) it can be as low as 15% [13]. The reasons for geographic, ethnic, diet, gender or age-based differences emissions of CH4 in human breath are not understood, and historical studies have likely suffered from issues such as poor detection limits of available analysers and limited sample populations (n < 100).”

“Results

Concentration enhancement of CO₂ in the breath of the participants ranged from 26.5 to 63.4 parts per thousand (2.65–6.34%) following a Gaussian distribution, with an arithmetic mean of 4.35 (4.29–4.43) % (Fig 1A). All participants exhaled CO₂, and while the data distribution skewed slightly towards higher values, overall, the data was relatively symmetrical around the mean. Concentration enhancement of CH₄ in breath varied from -0.56 to 49.6 ppm, following a log-normal distribution with an arithmetic mean concentration of 5.08 and Zou’s mean of 4.26 (3.37–5.54) ppm (Fig 1B). While the lowest of these values is negative (emitted concentration below the 2 ppm background), the precision of the GC instrument is approximately 0.04 ppm (Drewer et al., 2021), thus the small number of negative values is likely to be instrumental noise as 55% of the concentration differences were less than the instrument precision. The distribution of concentration enhancement of CH₄ are heavily skewed towards higher values, with a large number of concentrations near zero. A total of 32 (31%) of the participants were classed as MPs (single or mean concentrations in breath measurements exceeded the 3 ppm threshold). The arithmetic mean concentration enhancement of all samples measured from the MPs was 17.1 ppm and the Zou’s mean was 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm. The arithmetic emitted mean of the concentration enhancement among NMPs was -0.1 ppm, with most samples reporting breath concentrations around the precision limit of the GC instrument (results from NMPs were essentially instrumental noise around zero). Therefore, it is approximated that 31% of people emitted a mean concentration of 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm CH₄ in their breath, while the rest emit effectively none. Concentration enhancement of N₂O in the breath of the participants also followed a log-normal distribution, ranging from 0.11 to 0.88 ppm with an arithmetic mean of 0.33 and a Zou’s mean of 0.329 (0.315–0.342) ppm (Fig 1C). The skew in the distribution of N₂O concentrations was more towards higher values than the CO₂ distribution, but not as extreme as that of CH₄ concentrations. No concentration enhancements of N₂O in breath were below background levels, indicating that while there is a large variation in observed N₂O concentrations, all participants emitted at least some N₂O.”Concentration enhancement of CO₂ in the breath of the participants ranged from 26.5 to 63.4 parts per thousand (2.65–6.34%) following a Gaussian distribution, with an arithmetic mean of 4.35 (4.29–4.43) % (Fig 1A). All participants exhaled CO₂, and while the data distribution skewed slightly towards higher values, overall, the data was relatively symmetrical around the mean. Concentration enhancement of CH₄ in breath varied from -0.56 to 49.6 ppm, following a log-normal distribution with an arithmetic mean concentration of 5.08 and Zou’s mean of 4.26 (3.37–5.54) ppm (Fig 1B). While the lowest of these values is negative (emitted concentration below the 2 ppm background), the precision of the GC instrument is approximately 0.04 ppm (Drewer et al., 2021), thus the small number of negative values is likely to be instrumental noise as 55% of the concentration differences were less than the instrument precision. The distribution of concentration enhancement of CH₄ are heavily skewed towards higher values, with a large number of concentrations near zero. A total of 32 (31%) of the participants were classed as MPs (single or mean concentrations in breath measurements exceeded the 3 ppm threshold). The arithmetic mean concentration enhancement of all samples measured from the MPs was 17.1 ppm and the Zou’s mean was 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm. The arithmetic emitted mean of the concentration enhancement among NMPs was -0.1 ppm, with most samples reporting breath concentrations around the precision limit of the GC instrument (results from NMPs were essentially instrumental noise around zero). Therefore, it is approximated that 31% of people emitted a mean concentration of 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm CH₄ in their breath, while the rest emit effectively none. Concentration enhancement of N₂O in the breath of the participants also followed a log-normal distribution, ranging from 0.11 to 0.88 ppm with an arithmetic mean of 0.33 and a Zou’s mean of 0.329 (0.315–0.342) ppm (Fig 1C). The skew in the distribution of N₂O concentrations was more towards higher values than the CO₂ distribution, but not as extreme as that of CH₄ concentrations. No concentration enhancements of N₂O in breath were below background levels, indicating that while there is a large variation in observed N₂O concentrations, all participants emitted at least some N₂O.”