Health Canada reported this week that it has revised upwards its estimates for the number of Canadian killed annually by air pollution to 5,900. Previously they had estimated 5,000 Canadian were killed annually. The Ontario Medical Association estimates that 1,900 of those deaths occur in Ontario, where air quality is the worst in the country.
At the risk of grave robbing (what I'd prefer is to use this news announcement as proof for something I have been thinking for a long time), I present a few questions to consider:
Where I live in Vancouver they call air pollution haze, as in, "I can't see Mount Baker today because of the haze." On weather reports we call a significant density of air pollution hazy conditions. A friend tells me that a common forecase in summers in Toronto is "hot, humid and hazy." I think all this repackaging of reality is a real disservice to all of us - it obscures the reality of our situation. Let's call air pollution Air Pollution and make the connection to our actions: driving our vehicles, buying imported products, hosting shipping and freight infrastructure. Let's cut through the haze.
The numbers for air pollution deaths don't really compare with the big 3 killers of Canadians: heart disease (74,000 deaths annually), stroke (16,000 deaths annually) and lung cancer (18,000 deaths annually). But the majority of people affected by the big 3 have made lifestyle choices to increase their risks. Fatty diets high in cholesterol, smoking and sedentary habits make people sick.
I don't mean to sound insensitive, but anyone looking around them in Canada can see the fat, lazy asses of our citizenry. Whether through ignorance or conscious decision, many people take their health for granted. Yet no one makes a lifestyle choice to breathe. It's sort of inherent to the species. Air pollution affects us all.
Stories like the Health Canada release make me feel very aware of the perception of threat that different diseases and causes of death carry with them. People worry about West Nile Virus but get killed crossing the street. Parents go to great lengths to protect their children from stalkers but more kids die in the bathtub than anywhere else. The public profile of air pollution and the resources dedicated to controlling and reducing it pale in comparison to other, high-profile problems. Someone with a morbid sense of humour might find laughter in our great human comedy of worry and waste, but tragedy seems to me the genre we're working in.
Posted by James Sherrett at May 3, 2005 04:22 PMI wonder when governments will treat polluters for the criminals they really are. Anybody else that kills 5000+ people a year would be considered a mass murderer or a serial killer.
The only way that governments can actually get these companies to understand that adding pollution to the ecosystem is no longer tolerable is to treat companies, their executives, board members and shareholders as members of an on-going criminal conspiracy.
Since corporations are legal entities, the corporation needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of criminal law for all deaths and illnesses due to pollutants. They also have to make sure that all corporate executives are prosecuted as mass murders. This will let corporate types know that this kind of behaviour will no longer be tolerated. Maximizing profits will not be tolerated at the expense of the life and health of members of society.
Board members need to also be prosected since these are the people that generally choose the heads of corporations. Once board members realize that they will be prosecuted for choosing profits over health, clean air and clean water, they will start to choose corporate executives that will work to reduce pollution.
Since shareholders are the actual owners of these corporations, (as few as 15 % of shares is enough to control a multi-national corporation, they need to be prosecuted also. People should not profit on the death and illness of others.
Since in my mind these are on-going criminal activities, it seems to me that anti-racketeering legislation can be used to take all of the assets of these corporations, shareholdes, board members and executives. Do this for just one of the worst corporate polluters and you would grab the attention of every other company that creates pollution.
Governments are also wrong in setting limits of tolerable pollution. That's why we are still having this problem. The only acceptable level of pollution is 0.
Posted by: Tim at June 12, 2005 02:06 PM