In terms of the health industry, it is clear that there have been many beneficial changes discussed in previous blog posts. However, a large issue has not been addressed thus far. Climate change in modern society is a controversial issue and one that needs immediate attention. But how can an industry focused on saving lives contribute to such a negative effect on the Earth? This blog post will be a discussion of this issue and the many caveats surrounding it.
Greenhouse gas emissions are a large contributor to the negative effects of climate change, like the depletion of the ozone layer in our atmosphere. In the United States alone, health care is responsible for about a tenth of the country’s greenhouse gas emission. Machinery necessary for certain medical procedures like CAT scanners, dialysis machines, and respirators come at a large energy expense, which is mostly met by fossil fuel usage. This is an incredibly tricky issue because although climate change is an immense problem, reducing some of the emissions produced by methods of care in hospitals comes at the expense of human lives. How far are people willing to go to save the environment?
Although it seems like a daunting task to approach this issue, there are several approaches that could be effective in both reducing greenhouse gas emissions of the health sector and maintaining the level of intense care that is necessary to maintain hospitals. First off, hospitals could commit to 100% clean energy, or at least significantly decrease their fossil fuel usage. As we have seen in recent years, the research and funding for clean energy discovery have paid off and the United States is seeing a significant increase in clean energy usage with increased options to make a cleaner choice. Hospitals can commit to these means of clean energy, as exemplified by Gundersen Health Systems, a nonprofit hospital network operating in the Midwest who, in 2014, became the first health system to achieve energy independence by producing their energy from wind power, solar power, and capturing methane from landfills (Chen, 2019). Many other health care companies and hospitals like Kaiser Permanente, Partners HealthCare, and Boston Medical Center are also working towards carbon neutrality by reducing their emissions (Belluz, 2019). This approach would make the health care system significantly reduce their contribution to the total emissions, making the United States a much cleaner nation.
Another approach is for doctors to educate policymakers about the health ramifications being caused by climate change itself. Not many people are educated on the different sicknesses increasing in prevalence due to climate change. An article describing the healthcare industry’s role in climate change explains that “…between 2030 and 2050, a quarter of a million deaths could be caused by climate change-related health problems — such as heat exposure, mosquito-borne diseases, and flooding. Air pollution, including household air pollution, already cause 6.5 million premature deaths each year” (Belluz, 2019). If people were more aware of how their energy and emission choices were directly affecting their health and the health of their future generations, they may be more motivated to ignite change. Groups like “American College of Physicians”, “Healthcare Without Harm”, the “Medical Society Consortium”, and “Physicians for Social Responsibility”, are groups of doctors and related individuals who are pushing for reduced emissions in their fields. Furthermore, health care organizations could divest from fossil fuel companies to cut off their financial dependence on them, making it easier to go green.
Although this issue seems like a double-edged sword, there truly are ways that could make a positive impact on the environment while also maintaining the procedures that make the healthcare system able to treat patients.
References
Belluz, Julia, and Umair Irfan. “Doctors Are Frightened by Climate Change. Their Industry Is a Big Part of the Problem.” Vox, Vox, 19 Jan. 2019, www.vox.com/2019/1/17/18184358/healthcare-doctors-climate-change-divesting.
Chen, Alice, and Vivek Murthy. “How Health Systems Are Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change.” Harvard Business Review, 19 Sept. 2019, hbr.org/2019/09/how-health-systems-are-meeting-the-challenge-of-climate-change.
I think it’s really important to consider the connection between healthcare and the environment. Our healthcare provides necessary services that are irreplaceable within the modern world. As a result, we have to optimize the resources that we have into improving the healthcare system as destruction is not an option. A commitment to cleaner energy as well as education would be a great start to help the fight against climate change, but I fear that many obstacles such as cost and enforcement lie in its path. Nevertheless, we must try to protect the environment through whatever means necessary in order to avoid the destruction of our planet.
This truly is a dichotomous issue, as climate change negatively affects health, but healthcare negatively affects the environment. It is undeniable that the current issues regarding climate change has negative health consequences, especially regarding respiratory health. We must consider how to make hospitals and other healthcare providers operate in a more environmentally friendly fashion. I agree that a commitment to clean energy is important, but I would also be interested to see if hospitals can avoid outsourcing a lot of cleaning in order to avoid transporting materials.
It is always very interesting reading your blogs because I honestly do not know about things occurring in the health system or about healthcare. Particularly in this post I didn’t even know that there was a connection in environmental damage to hospitals and medical centers. I agree with you that greenhouse gases are dangerous, and these facilities should certainly limit their emissions!