December  was an important month in the struggle to avert human-induced climate change. First, Ed Miliband, the UK energy and climate change minister, called for mass action to pressure governments into signing a meaningful deal to battle global warming at critical UN talks in Copenhagen in December 2009. Second, fifty seven activists obstructed Stansted Airport runway. Of these, fifty were arrested for aggravated trespass, three for trying to enter a restricted area and four on conspiracy to commit a public nuisance. Twenty two of the first group admitted the charge, presumably on legal advice, and were served community service orders. This is despite the decision of a jury only a few weeks earlier in favour of the six activists who painted “Gordon” on Kingsnorth power station. These six were deemed legally justified because they were trying to prevent climate change causing greater damage to property around the world. more…

There are so many very good reasons for clinicians to seriously address climate change. One of the more compelling reasons is the health co-benefits argument. The rationale here is that actions that tackle climate change (taking more exercise, using cars and less often, cutting out air travel, eating much less meat, etc…) will be good, not only to address serious climate change, but also for our immediate health (reduced risk of diabetes, obesity, colon cancer, CHD, better mental health, reduced transport trauma, less air pollution, etc…) more…

On 19 of October I arrived in Madrid, the the place of beautiful parks, live flamenco, brilliant nightlife, churros, a Spanish type of long thin doughnut, El Rastro, an enormous outdoor market, and the Golden Triangle of art museums. But I wasn’t really there for the tapas, I was there for environmental health matters. I am taking one year out of medical school to explore medical journalism, and word reached me that there was a workshop for young journalists in Spain on the topics of health and the environment, with the World Health Youth (WHY) Communication Network on environment and health. more…

By now you will know that the UK Committee on Climate Change has recommended that the 2050 target should be increased from a 60% reduction against baseline to 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (principally carbon dioxide). This has now been accepted by the UK Government.

This makes the target (rightly) extremely challenging. It now needs to be remembered that this sort of target won’t be reached by doing today’s business more efficiently;. Changing light bulbs, sharing cars and flying a little less is not going to get us to these targets. They are all necessary actions to take now (i.e. doing more of what many of us are already doing in today’s job more efficiently) – necessary but NOT sufficient. This level of new targets give the clearest evidence yet that we need a radically low carbon society (and a health service to match - which will mean that health care will need to be delivered in radically different ways. The core principles of the NHS may well be the same, but after the first 60 years where much of today’s NHS would be unrecognisable to Nye Bevan, the next 60 years, indeed the next 40 years will see an NHS largely unrecognisable to us – for all the usual reasons, technology, societal expectations, and perhaps demography, but increasingly because of the profound role (ands opportunity) the NHS has to be a leading public sector exemplar in stimulating and creating large behavioural change in the population.

We have no right to steal from future generations. At the end of this month, the consultation will close on the proposed carbon reduction strategy for the NHS in England. This country is the first in the world to start legislating on climate change, the most serious and urgent health threat to current and future generations. Doctors, scientists, and other health professionals have a special responsibility to urge our colleagues, communities, policy makers, and politicians to take this threat seriously now by concerted action. more…

Should doctors advise people to limit the number of children they have for the sake of the environment, asks the latest bmj.com poll. Our decision to ask this question was triggered by a huge amount of weekend coverage of the editorial by John Guillebaud and Pip Hayes: Population growth and climate change.  Scotsman columnist Gerald Warner accuses doctors of being conscripted into the bogus “man-made” global warming hysteria who should stick to the day job instead of being missionaries for “progressive dogma.” more…

Having been back in Leicester for a couple of weeks, I have had the pleasure of being re-united with an old and faithful friend – my bike.

more…

Last week the geopolitics of the biofuel debacle looked something like this. On the left both geographically and politically, we had Evo Morales, President of the very poor and increasingly hungry Bolivia, pleading “la vida primero los autos segundos” (life first, cars second), exhorting the wealthy world to stop burning food in their cars.

On the right, we had Gordon Brown, fresh out of his food summit, calling for more agricultural research, free trade and food aid for the starving. more…

Earlier this year I declined an invitation to fly all expenses from Sydney to Geneva to speak for 15 minutes at an international cancer conference. There was a hole in my calendar. Geneva is a hop from Lyon, where I have good friends. I have a son in London who I haven’t seen for a while. It was tempting.  But the carbon footprint and the derisory speaking time got to me.  more…

I’ve been outed. Not for my exotic sexual preferences, sadly, but for being a climate hypocrite. A West Coast operation called Medgadget has set up a website tracking my travels – they’ve so far documented 12 trips since 1995, including a couple of walks around the corner to give talks in London – and are asking people to report any sightings of me at conferences. more…