The smog of war

Lets start with the bad news: climate change and global warming are already affecting our health and it will get worse. How much worse requires research and assessment and we have not undertaken a comprehensive study. Few middle income countries have but that is no excuse for doing nothing.

Most European have completed what is known as a climate change health impact assessment. Heatstroke related deaths caused by very hot European summers prompted them to take action. As temperatures will rise we must expect more deaths due to heatstroke worldwide.

The raging fires in California, Australia, the Cape (the Cape of Fire Storms!) and elsewhere have tragically highlighted the need to adjust human settlement patterns and prepare better for the devastation they bring.

How does climate change and global warming affect the health of human beings? The 2004 International Comparative Risk Assessment examined health risks and they estimated that 166,000 deaths in 2000. They also estimated that the lives of individuals were shortened by 5,5 million years because of climate change factors.

Diseases associated with climate change and global warming include cardiovascular disease, diarrhoea, malaria, fatal accident injuries and malnutrition resulting the unavailability of daily calorie intake.

The International Panel on Climate Change talks about the health effects of temperature change; wind, storms, floods, drought and nutrition, food security and food safety; water and disease; air quality, aeroallergens and disease; vector borne, rodent born and other infectious diseases; and finally, occupational health and ultraviolet radiation.

The health community has a very good idea of the range of health problems that climate brings directly – heatstroke for example – and indirectly – nutrition for example. We also know that climate change will worsen exist inequities, which are considerable, in the access people have to the means of healthy living and to health care.

We are all too aware of the perverse twist of injustice where people least responsible for accelerating climate change and global warming carry the brunt of the consequences. These are the countries of the developing world but they exclude India and China in Asia and South Africa in the context of Africa, who are significant emission culprits.

Not only that, the countries most affected by climate change and global warming are often the same countries that lack the resources, skill and infrastructure to respond by way of large scale mitigation, adaptation and nation-wide planning.

Finally, we know well that countries of the developing world carry the burden of infectious disease such as malaria, tuberculosis and HIV while countries of the developed carry have to deal with diseases of aging populations such as cardiovascular problems. Climate change and global warming will have different health effects therefore.

So what is the good news you may well ask? At a conference hosted by the Tällberg Foundation of Sweden and held in Stellenbosch towards the end February the possible areas of human intervention were roundly and vigorously discussed. How does Africa feature in the world’s plans to be discussed in Copenhagen at the end of 2009?

As climate change and global warming is a global phenomenon prompted in their extremities by human conduct, so the solution will require unprecedented human cooperation. There is little question that, unless proper planning for food production and distribution starts now, many food (and water) wars will break out.

In an extraordinary document (Grasping the climate crisis: A provocation) written by Bo Ekman, Johan Rockström & Anders Wijkman, they argue that ‘the ultimate effectiveness of the post-2012 climate agreement depends on global governance reform that promotes the greater common good over national interests’ (see www.tallbergfoundation.org).

They also rightly observe that we must collectively address the policy and market failures that produce environmental degradation and implement effective enforcement policies. This ought to follow the so-called ‘contraction and convergence model’ where developed countries must reduce their massive emissions while developing countries may increase theirs’ modestly.

The rise of President Barack Obama is the single biggest bit of good news for the world for he has undertaken to get the United States of America to behave responsibly in the environmental domain.

We should likewise look very closely at whether ESKOM is capable of doing what is best for the people of the continent. We should start planning a climate change health impact assessment for our country now. It should be a no-brainer for the Department of Health and Medical Research Council?