Peaceful protests, in which cars are stopped on highways and city roads, or protestors sit in front of government buildings and financial institutions, produce mixed feelings among the general public. While cyclists likely aren’t bothered by climate change protests, motorists affected by resulting traffic jams mostly show disapproval at a minimum, if not absolute aversion, think of urgently needing to drive somewhere, such as a family member with severe health issues to a doctor or even the hospital, and having such a disruption.
Ask climate activists along the Mississippi River between New Orleans and Baton Rouge, nicknamed “Cancer Alley,” and they might approve any climate protest, regardless of how disruptive it may be. Louisiana is home to at least 15 oil refineries that represent 20% of the refining capacity in the United States. The number of cases of people in these communities who are diagnosed with cancer or suffering from respiratory or reproductive damage is extraordinary – far above the national average in the US. No matter what your opinion is about climate protests, the health consequences of the human activities that trigger climate change affects us all.
Health professionals have been trying to inform and engage governments about improving health and tackling climate change, including how the world needs to be prepared for the large-scale and imminent health impacts of climate change. In 2016, the independent medical journal The Lancet launched The Lancet Countdown headquartered at the University College London to “ensure that health is at the center of how decision makers understand and respond to climate change.” Its team, formed by a community of almost 300 leading researchers from around the world, track and understand the evolving links between climate change and people’s health.
Despite these researchers’ compelling annual reports monitoring progress – or lack thereof – on health and climate change, governments’ action has not sped up accordingly. Frustration among health professionals has mounted as they increasingly see patients suffering from harm caused by pollution and the effects of climate change, such as extreme heat and drought.
In October 2023, doctors from around the world united to call for urgent climate action. This show of unity was unprecedented. Global health bodies demanded all governments immediately cease expansion of new fossil fuel infrastructure and production, and fast-track renewable energy. The signatories include health bodies from Canada, India, Europe, Pacific nations and the UK.
***
Three months earlier, in June 2023, an Open Letter signed by more than 2,500 UK academics, in every field you can think of, asked Britain’s Royal Society (an independent scientific academy dedicated to promoting scientific excellence) to issue an unambiguous statement condemning the fossil fuel industry for driving the climate crisis. The academics expressed their concerns about the influence of fossil fuel companies on scientific research. But in May this year, The Royal Society refused to confirm the role of oil and gas companies in climate change, offering vague arguments.
Isaac Newton, once a fellow of the 363-year-old Royal Society, would not have approved. Indeed, he’s likely turning over in his grave about the refusal of the scientific academy to attribute climate change to the biggest polluters, fossil fuel companies, and also about its endorsement of geological carbon capture and storage as an alternative technology to climate change. This technology, promoted by the fossil fuel industry, is climate change resistance on autopilot. Many researchers and environmental justice activists directly affected by the implementation of carbon capture and storage technology in the state of Louisiana have described it as a “climate scam.” Certainly, Louisiana processes the greatest number of applications for carbon capture storage projects in the US.
In February this year, I wrote about veteran activist Dr. Beverly Wright. As an academic, and also a young woman, she has fought against all odds to change the dynamics of research work between university researchers and the communities they study that are harmed by fossil fuel pollution and hazardous operations. She created the “Communiversity” model in partnership with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). This model acknowledges the integration of the valuable input of the community with the theoretical knowledge of academicians for effective research and policy-making which could ultimately help the community. To me, this model speaks of all the potential that the academic community embodies to find viable solutions to climate, if activists and communities work together.
On one side, there is a strong resistance by fossil fuel companies to entirely rethink their business, and on the other side there are people gluing themselves to art pieces or protesting on the roads. But, increasingly, academics and doctors have begun to be concerned about the bit in the middle, the part of the process that is rarely featured in the media as much as climate protests are: WHY governments and academic institutions don’t intervene with determination against climate change, and more importantly in favor of our health?
***
It is not surprising that academics have been increasingly joining activist groups who organize peaceful climate protests. Jason Scott-Warren, professor in the Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic at Cambridge University, is a climate activist. He coordinated the Open Letter to the Royal Society, and has been arrested on numerous occasions for taking part in environmental protest actions.
Last week I virtually attended the 2024 International Health Lecture on “Climate crisis, cities and health” organized by The Academy of Medical Sciences and The Lancet in London. Professor Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen, Head of the Climate, Air Pollution, Nature and Urban Health Research Programme at ISGlobal in Barcelona, Spain, highlighted the climate impacts of cities and how this affects population health. He also explored the positive role cities can take in climate action to reduce CO2 emissions and improve health. “We know that these fossil fuels are responsible for more than 5 million deaths each year because of air pollution,” said Nieuwenhuijsen.
In a panel discussion that followed his presentation, Niheer Dasandi, Professor of Global Politics and Sustainable Development at the University of Birmingham, acknowledged that so far only social action has shown demonstrable results on policy-makers and governments. Indeed social movements have always been behind the most powerful changes in our world – from banning smoking on airplanes to allowing women to vote. As compelling research falls on deaf ears, doctors are also gradually turning to forms of direct action like participating in climate protests to see results.
Unfortunately, this comes at a price. Dr Marina Romanello, Executive Director of The Lancet Countdown, mentioned in the panel the suspension of the medical licenses of two doctor colleagues for their participation in climate protests. A new Open Letter is currently gathering signatures to ask the General Medical Council to reconsider their medical licenses suspensions. By the time I received the link already over 1,800 people have signed. The time has come for academics and doctors to join forces for a common cause. Every day doctors, academics, teachers and activists in the UK keep adding their names to the list. The letter will be delivered to the GMC’s London offices this Thursday 24 October at 3 pm.
In the next weeks the final decision by the GMC will show if the bold gesture of supporting doctor colleagues can be a more powerful tool to mobilize public institutions and governments than a global call for climate change – and if this localized success may translate into broader systemic change.
