[sergioisidoro]

Yes they are debatable. There are cognitive performance tests that show statistically significant decline in many tasks above 1500ppm, especially on planning tasks. That's independently of the feeling of "stuffiness".

If these measurable declines have a sufficient impact on our lives and productivity is the debatable part.

Edit: here's one reference: "We also found effects of CO2 (a proxy for ventilation) on cognitive function. For every 500ppm increase, we saw response times 1.4-1.8% slower, and 2.1-2.4% lower throughput"

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/healthybuildings/2021/09/09/imp...

[clairity]

if you look at the paper, you see no such conclusive evidence, but rather weak correlative assertions in noisy and complex environments. also notice the incentives and implicit bias of the involved. unbiased studies from the past several decades have so far shown cognitive effects require 10× that level of CO₂ to show any conclusive effects. even the pm2.5 effects attempt to make a short-term correlation, which is dubious at best. long-term pm2.5 effects are more conclusive, which is why we should be more concerned about them.

CO₂ is a fashionable concern but not scientifically supported. more importantly, it distracts from things we really should be concerned about as states and nations, like actual pollution and the alarming concentration of power and wealth.

[sergioisidoro]

See, they are debatable after all - we are debating them. There is data, there are some correlations that are statistically significant, and some raise even more questions — like why performance lowers at 1200ppm, but goes back up at higher concentrations in this article published on Nature in a very controlled environment - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-019-0071-6

I don't think this topic distracts from anything. I live in Finland, where indoor air quality is a big topic (mycotoxins and spores due to mold in old houses, burning wood in residential areas due to particulate emissions on cold days, construction codes, etc), while the country is making strides to become carbon neutral, and has one of the lowest economical inequality in the world.

But anyway, as I mentioned in the initial comment, the high CO2 just raised my attention to the bad ventilation of the house, and that includes ventilation of particulates from activities like cooking.

[clairity]

the CO₂ levels we see day-to-day (as long as you don't work in certain very specific industries) cannot have the effects that are fashionable to discuss. it's bullshit, an intentional disconcern for truth. bullshit by definition is distracting, as it literally takes attention away from truth-seeking and effective policy-making.