A delicate balance

3 minute read

The intrinsic link between human health and the health of the natural world is not a new concept, but it is one that is being brutally demonstrated right before our eyes. Our planet is a mind bendingly complex cacophony of delicately balanced systems. Mess with these systems (like the deforestation and biodiversity loss we discussed last month) and it stands to reason that something very bad could and eventually will happen. You can’t say we didn’t see it coming either – the World Economic Forum included “infectious diseases” amongst its top global risks for 2020 and I’m sure that by now most of you will have seen Bill Gate’s 2015 TED talk doing the rounds on social media. While the worlds natural systems (and the virus) do not recognise arbitrary human-made borders, the problem is that our political systems and institutions are not set up to operate with such seamless inter-connectivity.

I see sustainability as the actions we take today which are in the best interests of the future. Obvious examples are things like reducing emissions now to mitigate the adverse impacts of climate change or reducing waste and pollution now to ensure that we can feed everyone in the future.

Innovations in healthcare and health-tech don’t usually spring to most people’s minds when thinking about sustainability but the same principles of acting now to improve future welfare hold true. Other critical factors not commonly associated with sustainability are of course trustworthy institutions, stable governance mechanisms and fair rule of law. All other areas of sustainability are utterly reliant on these for efficient and effective implementation as well as to provide/incentivise funding.

The difference the Climate Crisis and the COVID one is of course that the effects of climate change feel slow (at least from the privileged perspective of the general public in a developed Westernised nation); the deaths it causes are not being reported every evening in the national news. The pandemic is showing us that we can actually respond to an existential threat very quickly if the threat is tangible and we listen to the science - but the difference between COVID and Climate Change of course is that it is in everyone’s (immediate) best interests to respond. The virus does not have any powerful fossil fuel lobbyists who’d rather things return to as they were. It has given us an unwelcome but unique opportunity to start over. What a waste it would be if we are unable to make the most of it?

Previous
Previous

“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”

Next
Next

Health-tech