Reduce emissions to benefit environment and public health, say medical experts

The Lancet has published research findings by an international collaboration of medical experts, which examine the public health benefits of low-carbon living. The 'Health and Climate Change' series have been published ahead of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen and calls for the medical benefits of action on climate change to be taken into account in international negotiations.

Some opinion leaders argue that the co-benefits to health arising from action on climate change are not widely appreciated, but that a greater awareness might sweeten the otherwise ‘bitter taste’ of climate change policies. Taken together, the research makes a strong case for linking efforts to tackle climate change and world health goals.

One of The Lancet papers that most clearly demonstrates the possible link between benefits to the environment and public health was produced by a research team led by Sharon Friel. It begins by showing that with the food and agriculture sector already contributing 10–12 per cent of total global GHG emissions, demand for animal source foods continues to increase. Achieving a substantial cut in emissions will depend on reducing the production of food from livestock.

Dr Friel argues that reducing the consumption of animal source foods could have spin-off benefits for cardiovascular health. For example, a 30 per cent fall in the adult consumption of saturated fat from animal sources would reduce heart disease in the population by around 15 per cent in the UK. “Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the food and agricultural sector could help to prevent climate change and reduce the burden of ischaemic heart disease,” concludes Dr Friel.

Another group of experts has examined efforts to reduce GHG emissions in urban land transport and concludes that there are many public health benefits to be gained from successful implementation of these strategies. Meeting emissions targets will require more walking and cycling and less motor vehicle use, which will bring obvious and substantial health benefits, including reduced obesity and lowering the rate of chronic diseases caused by physical inactivity. The Lancet paper shows that in London, more active travel would bring other substantial health gains. Heart disease and stroke could fall by 10–20 per cent, with reductions in breast cancer (12–13 per cent), dementia (eight per cent), and depression (five per cent).

One of The Lancet papers argues that uptake of low carbon electricity generation could also benefit public health. It shows how changing methods of electricity generation to reduce carbon emissions would reduce particulate air pollution and deaths, with the greatest positive effect likely to be seen in India. Moreover, the cost of these environmental changes could be significantly offset by reduced costs of death from pollution, especially in India and China.

A paper by Paul Wilkinson et al. demonstrates that in the UK, improvements in household energy efficiency could have net benefits for health, mainly through improved indoor temperature and air quality. “New stove technologies have the potential to bring emission of products of incomplete combustion from biomass stoves down nearly to those of clean fuels, such as liquefied petroleum gas,” comments Paul Wilkinson.

The series of papers makes a strong case that climate mitigation strategies will have additional and mostly beneficial effects on health, and provides an additional and compelling rationale for efforts to reduce emissions. On the eve of the UN conference, The Lancet carries a message from the some of the world’s medical experts that the health gains associated with climate change policies must feature prominently in the Copenhagen negotiations. “In view of the trillions of dollars likely to be spent on greenhouse gas mitigation in the coming decades, the relatively small resources needed to guide investments along paths bringing the world closer to its health and climate goals would be money well spent.”