The President's advisors have been divided between environmentalists pushing for strong action and economic and other advisors urging caution. Unofficial reports of the policy options now before the President indicate that economic arguments may be winning out over public health in this internal White House debate. Such a cap would serve as a loophole for polluters and would make a treaty meaningless. Such policies would be totally inconsistent with the gravity and urgency of the global warming threat. As health professionals, you speak for the public whose health is at risk from global warming and the associated heat stress, increased air pollution, extreme weather, and spreading infectious diseases like malaria and dengue fever.
Industry always overestimates the costs of environmental protection.
Physicians ' Statement on Climate Change and Human Health, which has been forwarded to the White House this month. The statement outlines the health threats posed by global warming and calls for early and meaningful action on the part of the U.S. and other industrialized nations to curb greenhouse gases. More than 1,100 physicians and health professionals from all 50 states and 25 countries have also signed the statement. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change this month released the first detailed study identifying potential climate change effects in the world's ten geographic regions. According to the study, the Arctic and small islands and other low-lying areas around the world would be extremely vulnerable to climate change.