A successful outcome at the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen this December is vital for our future as a species, and for our civilisation. Failure to agree radical reductions in emissions would spell a global health catastrophe, write Lord Michael Jay and Professor Sir Michael Marmot, in a Comment published Online First in both The Lancet and The British Medical Journal.
The scientific evidence that global temperatures are rising and that man is responsible has been widely accepted since the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. There is now equally wide consensus that the world must reduce CO2 emissions to at most 50% of 1990 levels by 2050, if it is to have even a 50% chance of preventing temperatures exceeding preindustrial levels by more than 2ºC, considered by many to be the tipping point for catastrophic and irreversible climate change.
The authors say: "These arguments need to be addressed head on. Climate change is global. Emissions know no frontiers. And the necessary measures should be seen not as a cost but as an opportunity. Coal-fired power stations pollute the atmosphere and worsen health. So does the internal combustion engine. Deforestation destroys biodiversity. Saving energy helps hard-pressed household budgets. Drought-resistant crops help poor farmers. So even without climate change, the case for clean power, electric cars, saving forests, energy efficiency, and new agricultural technology is strong.4 Climate change makes it unanswerable."
They add: "Crucially for winning hearts and minds in richer countries, what is good for the climate is good for health…a low-carbon diet (especially eating less meat) and more exercise will mean less cancer, obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. Opportunity, surely, not cost."
They conclude: "A successful outcome at Copenhagen is vital for our future as a species and for our civilisation. It will require recognition by the rich countries of their obligations to the poor; and recognition by the poor countries that climate change is a global problem that requires a global solution in which we all have to play a part. It will require a new mindset: that the measures needed to mitigate the risks of climate change and adapt to its already inevitable effects provide an opportunity to achieve goals that are desirable in their own right—the achievement of the MDGs in the poor countries and a healthier more equal society in the rich world and globally. Failure to agree radical reductions in emissions spells a global health catastrophe, which is why health professionals must put their case forcefully now and after Copenhagen."
In Correspondence which accompanies the Comment, doctors' leaders across the globe—represented by Professor Ian Gilmore, President of The Royal College of Physicians, London, UK—say: "There is a real danger that politicians will be indecisive, especially in such turbulent economic times as these. Should their response be weak, the results for international health could be catastrophic… As leaders of physicians across many countries, 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 that will benefit the health of communities worldwide."
Professor Sir Michael Marmot, International Institute for Society and Health, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, UK T) +44 (0)20 7679 1694 E) m.marmot@ucl.ac.uk
Professor Ian Gilmore, President, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK. (via RCP Press Office) T) +44 (0)20 3075 1254 E) linda.cuthbertson@rcplondon.ac.uk
http://press.thelancet.com/climatechange.pdf
Journal
The Lancet