18 – Health Issues

I wrote earlier that the question I am posed most frequently during my speaking engagements is why people who live in more developed countries should care about what conditions are like in less developed countries. And, perhaps the most basic reason is simply that we are already connected with those countries in many ways. Consumers in more developed nations, for example, are involved in an interdependent trading relationship with lesser developed nations which appears to be benefiting us more than it is them.

There are, of course, many complex reasons for the extent of the poverty common throughout the developing world. But, at least at one level, the cause of that poverty is pretty simple. Lesser developed countries still make up a majority of the world’s population; and yet people who live in more developed nations like Canada or the United States (who make up less than 20% of the global population) own, control, or consume the majority of the of the world’s annual wealth.

Of course, it is natural for people to be motivated by self-interest, so it’s hard for many people to be too concerned with what’s happening in other countries as long as the situation is benefiting them. We, the residents of the North, won’t really become concerned until we understand that what happens in other nations has a direct impact upon us, on our lifestyles and expectations. And that is not something which might occur sometime in the future. That is something taking place right at this moment.

Consider the impact that the SARS outbreak had on the city of Toronto in the Spring and Summer of 2003.

SARS is an acronym for “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome.” It is a viral respiratory illness which can result in death. As far as we can tell, the first outbreak of SARS occurred in the Guangdong province of China in November of 2002. Local officials didn’t have the financial resources to respond appropriately, or even to adequately monitor the outbreak of the new disease. And as it began to spread, the Chinese government made the unfortunate decision to try to conceal the extent of the problem.

The first Toronto case was a 78-year-old woman who had returned from a visit to Hong Kong. She went into the hospital on March 7, 2003. All the other cases of SARS which occurred in Toronto that summer can be traced back to this single individual.

By March 25th there were 27 suspected cases in the city, and four weeks later, the World Health Organization was concerned enough that they issued a travel advisory on Toronto. That advisory had an immediate impact on tourism. Conventions and conferences were cancelled. Hotel occupancy rates were cut in half. The situation for the hospitality industry was so severe that the president of the Greater Toronto Hotel Association predicted it would take years for their members to recover from the losses. Investment and security firms estimated that the disease cost Canada $30 million a day.

It has become a cliché to talk about how the world is shrinking, and there is a tendency to dismiss clichés. But the rapid spread of SARS demonstrates just how accurate that cliché is.

Even more dramatic than SARS has been the spread of the AIDS virus. In the 1980s when world attention was first drawn to AIDS, it was believed the disease primarily affected homosexual men and, for some reason, people from Haiti. Today the disease has been found in every nation on the planet, and most newly infected individuals are heterosexual women. The AIDS epidemic is so severe that a CIA report produced for the Clinton administration in the United States identified it as a “national security” issue.

So medical conditions in lesser developed nations can have a powerful impact far beyond their borders. And so too can environmental decisions made in those countries.