James Barson, MD
writes: There is a critical dependence of modern medicine on the
productive capacity and complexity per se of our modern industrial
society. Given the absolute dependence of our industrial economy on
abundant cheap energy, I’m sure that Peak Oil (PO) means huge problems
for high tech medicine. There is some evidence that high levels of
interconnectedness and complexity increase instability and promote the
chance of collapse. But how best to get this point across? The idea
that progress is not a God given certainty is, to many people,
literally unthinkable. I remember James Kunstler’s story about the
bright young things in Silicon Valley who believed that technology
trumped energy.

Looking at nature one can see the that in high
energy parts of the biosphere e.g. tropical rainforests, there is a
huge depth of diversity and niche specialisation e.g. hummingbirds
dependant one or two types of flower. This is where we are now. Whereas
in low energy areas e.g. the subarctic where then tundra meets the tree
line, the level of biodiversity is low and the archetypal animal is the
bear, a totally flexible and opportunistic omnivore. That’s where we
are headed.

I went a scientific meeting on the weekend and saw
a presentation on radio frequency ablation of aberrant conduction
pathways in the heart to control arrhythmias. The imagery from the
latest technology was breathtakingly beautiful, totally intuitive in
its display and stunningly informative but totally dependent very
expensive, very small volume, very high technology manufacturing of
single use equipment. With what I foresee as the economic impact of
Peak Oil on the entire pyramid of our industrial economy with possible
primary feedstock collapse, logistical collapse, financial collapse
etc, I cannot see this sort of manufacturing and technical support
being possible for much longer. Am I wrong? Will it still continue for
those who can afford it? There are so many levels at which problems
will arise that I think it must fail. It doesn’t have to disappear, it
only has to become dangerously unreliable. I think we will have to move
from the tropical rainforest towards the tundra. Probably a good idea
with runaway global warming anyway!

I think that medicine is
going to have to abandon its fixation with the latest and the best and
move from the constant search for the newest cutting edge technology
and instead start to think about rehabilitating viable trailing edge
technologies that have been shown to deliver good enough results at
lower levels of waste and energy consumption. (Hat tip to John Michael Greer.)
And in the process become less specialised, more generalist, with a
broader preventative focus aiming for the maximum benefit for the
maximum number and accept that, just maybe: ‘Better is the enemy of
good’. (08/17/08)
more…

BBC Enviornmental Science — While global attention has recently focused on energy and food, a global summit this week in Stockholm, Sweden, will tackle the key issue of water.

The World Water Week meeting starts on Sunday and will hear renewed calls to solve growing challenges of sanitation, climate change and drinkable supplies.

Sanitation in particular is one of the most important global issues.

The organisers say lack of adequate sanitation is a scandal that costs the lives of 1.4m children every year.

Investing in this area, say scientists, is the most cost effective health intervention the world could make.

While global concerns about energy and food are real, experts say that tackling key water issues is more fundamental to the world and long-term sustained action is needed urgently.

The 2,500 experts will be considering whether the world will have enough water resources to cope with rising populations.

By 2025, 1.8bn people will be living in regions with absolute water scarcity.

But getting political agreement on how to share or protect water seems to be as far away as ever. (08/17/08)
more…