(HIT ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE)It has been an enduring mystery why the medical community in South Florida has not been at the forefront, helping citizens stem the tide of damage to the environment and public health, permitted by legislators even when violating public health standards is against the law (ie. rock mining that introduces benzene, a cancer-causing substance, to the drinking water aquifer near the West Dade Wellfield).
In a scarcely noted, recent letter: that changed.
A set of recommendations by the Environment and Health Section of the Florida Medical Association addresses three important issues: The Urban Development Boundary, Climate Change and Energy, and mercury in fish.
Philanthropy to medicine is deeply ingrained in South Florida. Yet, neither philanthropists who charter hospitals, wings and specialty educational facilities nor doctors (with one exception: the outstanding example of Dr. James Jude) have supported environmental groups involved in protecting the public health.
With its letter, the doctors acknowledge that the physician's credo, "first, do no harm" extends equally to advocacy against harm to public health from bad policy on land use, energy, and toxics.
If physicians are starting to speak out when treatment of symptoms--like cancers and endocrine disrupters--have causes tied to other facets of public policy, that's a very good sign of progress.
It is easy if you are a physician--in fact, it's almost a necessity-- to become wrapped up in the care of one's patients.
It is as easy for physicians as for ordinary people from other professions to say, simply, that the environment is someone else's problem, or, business opportunity.
Within the next few months, the Miami Dade County Commission will be taking up, again, applications by developers to move the Urban Development Boundary.
This will be yet another occassion for the citizens to put the building industry in the spotlight. Perhaps, this time, the county commission will take the opportunity to listen to the doctors, if not the people (or the judiciary). Because commissioners get sick too, and wouldn't it be terrible if their own health difficulties were linked, directly or indirectly, to public health traumas caused by their own land use policies.
Some politicians laugh at the naivete of the clamoring public: don't people know that there is a closed loop system of governance in America today? Industry insiders, lobbyists, engineers, professional bureaucrats, and public office?
Well, not exactly. Everything is connected to everything else. That's what the study of medicine teaches, too.
(Dr. Todd Sack was appointed to the Florida Energy Commission in 2006. He received his Doctor of Medicine degree at the University of California School of Medicine, and his Bachelor’s Degree in science at Yale College. As Chairman of the Florida Medical Association’s Environment and Health Section, he has developed educational programs and FMA policy positions on topics related to energy use and public health. Dr. Sack is a two-term member and chairperson of the Jacksonville Environmental Protection Board. He also is a member of JEA’s Clean Power Advisory Board, and a member of the Florida Department of Health’s Community Environmental Health
Advisory Board.)
2 comments:
We can only hope that Florida officials pay more attention to scientists than the Bush administration. Are you listening County Commissioners?
There was a similar situation that developed in California with those concerned with air quality and industry lobbyist vis a vis the California Air Resources Board (CAB). For the most part doctors, especially inclusion with bid insurers and the corporatist doctors groups (like HMOs) affiliated with Kaiser were bought off, however the American Lung Association, mostly due to strong leadership took a prominent role with environmental groups in advocating for strong clean air legislation against polluting industries mostly lead by the domestic automakers. Interestingly the Growth Machine was divided. For instance, some cities in the Inland Empire (Riverside, San Berdino etc) were very much for stronger legislation, despite the areas republican leanings, however, other areas were bought off by the automakers who tried to locate factories (GM & Toyota) and design studios (Nissan) in CA to appease local Growth Machines. Because the automakers controlled the development of technology they mostly controlled the debate, for instance the CAB had to fold on their rules that mandated increasing zero emission vehicles sold in CA in the early 1990s. In retrospect a terrible shame, for both global warming and the big three automakers, because if GM had been forced to perfect EV1, which would have forced the
other domestics to follow suit, they all might not be in the shape they are today with a lack of hybrids and too many SUVs.
Post a Comment