The health lobby's contributions to the climate debate have been at best eccentric and typically irrational. Who can forget Andy Haines' putting the cost of carbon at $1000 per tonne, for example? Or what about UCL's Anthony Costello telling the world that climate change is the biggest threat to global health, sentiments echoed by Fiona Godlee at the BMJ here.
It's amusing then to see a team of geographers from, erm, UCL, among them Mark Maslin, effectively telling the health lobby to get a grip:
This commentary critically engages with the argument that climate change is the greatest threat to global health in the twenty-first century. A review of climate-health examples suggests that although it is important to be aware of the risk that climate change presents, health status is caused and mediated by multiple exposures. The current evidence suggests the impact of climate change over the next 30 years is not going to be catastrophic for health, and positioning it as the greatest threat – instead of other important factors such as poverty and health inequalities – could obscure the potential of current global health measures and reduce focus on other health risks such as non-communicable diseases and HIV/AIDS. Although climate change mitigation is vitally important to reduce far-future harm, the policymaking community should focus on current interventions that reduce populations’ exposure to climate change, boost populations’ ability to adapt, and reduce health inequalities.
It's paywalled, but the link is here.