Interesting. I ask for evidence of air rage being caused by hypoxia and the response is to post links to three articles, only one of which (as far as I can see, but would be pleased to be corrected by a quote) mentions any connection between them and that was an opinion given in an article on the author's web site. The author is, as far as I can see from the information that she gives about herself, qualified to assert what happened in aircraft cabins until 1987 (after which she was no longer a member of cabin crew) but unqualified to pontificate on matters of physiology. In other words, she is unqualified both to make a link between what happens now in aircraft cabins and is unqualified to make any link with physiological or pharmacological effects. She quotes a medical doctor who expresses the opinion that the link could be proved but, TTBOMK, has failed to do this.

I also note that her assertion with respect to hypoxia and air rage includes the air being "high in toxic chemicals and alergens". In other words, she has made no attempt to separate her alleged affects of hypoxia from those of allergic reactions and of poisoning by toxins. FWIW, I have no problem with the notion that toxins (if they exist) and ethanol (the effects of which are exacerbated by low pressure and oxygen and which is readily available to passengers) can cause behaviour changes and may be a contributory factor in air rage, but the specific assertion that I was examining is that hypoxia is responsible for it.

This probably highlights a major difference between orthodox and deceptive methodologies, i.e. that the latter is readily prepared to pretend that opinion is evidence and that highly suspect methodology is valid as long as it supports the pre-conceived notion.

--

Stephen