Doctors and the health crisis of global warming

Let’s look at the facts. Global warming inevitably leads to a global health crisis. Health and disease are the province of the medical profession. Shouldn’t doctors be speaking out on the health crisis of global warming?

Last month the two leading British medical journals – The Lancet and the British Medical Journal — published an open letter to doctors on climate change. In the US, the Journal of the American Medical Association also published a commentary on this subject. Both the US and UK arguments drew on the same evidence and made the same dire predictions.

The US commentary concluded with an appeal to the public health profession: “This is a critical time for public health advocates to demand that political leaders safeguard the health of the world’s population, with particular attention to the survival needs of the most disadvantaged.”

The British publications appealed directly to doctors: “Doctors are still seen as respected and independent, largely trusted by their patients and the societies in which they practise. … We call on doctors to demand that their politicians listen to the clear facts that have been identified in relation to climate change and act now to implement strategies.”

The American appeal to public health emphasizes the value of a body of knowledge — public health expertise. On the other hand, the British appeal directly to doctors emphasizes the prestige of the medical profession and its ability to influence public opinion and, in turn, politicians. It’s a subtle difference, but not an insignificant one.

The priority of financial interests for the US medical profession

We may be at a low point for US doctor when it comes to public respect. During the summer’s contentious discussions of health care reform, doctors were repeatedly portrayed as acting solely in their financial (read “selfish”) interest. This is accepted as the American way of life, of course. Only a small minority of commentators argue that human health should not be a profit-making business enterprise.

However, the message the public hears is that paying doctors less will not reduce health care costs — doctors will simply maintain their income by ordering more procedures. This is why, according to this analysis, health care costs and insurance premiums will continue spiraling out of control. Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately, this is a gross oversimplification of a complex problem, but that’s the take-away offered by cable news.

This is not a flattering portrait of American MDs.. British doctors, who aren’t compensated in the same way as US doctors, aren’t subject to the same criticisms. Perhaps that’s why British medical journals can speak so confidently of the trust and respect granted doctors by patients and society.

The British Empire and the world’s poor

There’s another explanation for differences in the US and the UK response to the global warming health crisis.

British medical journals write far more extensively about the health problems of developing nations than do US medical journals. Undoubtedly this has roots in the expanse of the British Empire. Many of the countries that will suffer most from climate change used to be controlled by the British. Intimate ties, abundant memories, and surely some sense of responsibility remain.

The British appear to have a more coherent understanding than do Americans of the complex health conditions in the technologically backward regions of world. The US lacks a comparable history of colonization, which may account for its more parochial view of the world.

Speaking out

US physicians – and public health professionals– should use their expertise and their remaining prestige to speak out on the issue of global warming. It can only enhance their reputation.

Related posts:
Scientists confront political attacks on climate change
Climate crisis. Health crisis. Same difference.
Global warming makes me sick
Climate change: Bad news for children’s health
Have fun. Help the environment. Sell cars.