When I entered my chosen profession, far too many years ago now, I did so in full expectation that the number of complete plonkers I would meet on my side of the fence would be kept to a minimum. For nigh on forty years this expectation has been fulfilled. I've come across, in general, very few total tossers. A few irritating sods, the odd thicko (mercifully not many of these which is a good thing considering the line of work I'm in), an uncoordinated being who couldn't tie his shoe laces let alone remove an appendix in a timely and safe fashion or two (these can easily be shifted off into paediatric virology or something equally useless and harmless) but by and large the medical profession is populated by reasonably intelligent people who think in straight lines and are personable to boot.
I am therefore unsure whether I am grateful or not to Mr Rockhopper. Mr R is a blast from the past who used to read this nonsense in it's previous life as 'Granny Herald' on fishing.net.nz He sent me a link to a story from the Times of London that blows all the above out of the water.
Any article that starts off 'Doctors are neglecting their duty by staying silent on the issue of climate change and its implications for public health, a leading doctor warns.' gets my attention and a vomit bowl. There are doctors who are complete and utter imbecilic wankers after all. The illusions of youth shattered by twenty four words. It gets worse by the line. The tosser who is quoted is one Sir Muir Gray. How can you take anything seriously that is the opinion of someone named after an anchor winch? He's already right up there with Alamein Kopu and a bloke I knew called Remy who really was named after a bottle of cognac. This dement used to be 'Chief Knowledge Officer for the National Health Service'. What the bloody hell is a 'knowledge officer'? And why do you have to have two or more so there is a chief one? No wonder the NHS is in dire straits if they are spending money on 'knowledge officers'. Anyway, Sir Anchor Winch is the full monty when it comes to climate change bollocks.
Before we delve further into this crap we'll have a go at the first sentence shall we? This wally is telling me that I'm neglecting my duty. To whom, pray tell? If you are suggesting the object of my neglect is my patients I'll rearrange your face for you with a Louisville Slugger. Wait a minute he's not talking to me after all as I am not 'staying silent'. I am shouting from the rooftops 'Anthropogenic global warming is a load of lefty political bollocks'. Got that, Sir Capstan? It's crap. Read my lips. Rubbish, tosh. bullshit. Plain enough yet?
OK, we've got that out of the way. What other pearls of wisdom (sic) does the foredeck appendage have for us? He continues thus: “doctors are effectively silent on the health threat that will come to define our age”. We've done the first bit. The second bit is beyond belief. Having read it many times I still cannot believe that it comes from the mind of a bloke who has a fully registrable medical degree. Climate change is a 'health threat'? Long bows don't even get close to it. Multi antibiotic resistant bacteria sprayed all over immunocompromised people I'd grant the appellation 'health threat' but not a warm summer and a shortened ski season. Pink Floyd (or even Sir Donald Bradman) define an age but never in a million years will a load of political hijacking of bogus science do so.
We move on - hellfire this is a struggle. 'Sir Running Backstay's warning follows the findings of a climate change commission from University College London, published in The Lancet, which identified a raft of public health implications that will come with global warming including patterns of disease and mortality, food security, water and sanitation and extreme events.' If we've been through the total insanity of yet another commission once we've been through it a hundred times, but what the hell is it doing getting published in the Lancet? This weekly journal is not peer reviewed (obviously not by me) but has had the reputation of being a very high standard medical newspaper. Their article selection is done by a small number of 'wise men' and The Lancet is where things get published in short order because they bypass the lengthy (months/years) peer review process. Well, the wise men must have taken to meeting in the boozer. This crap has no place in a reputable medical journal.
The Times reports this inclusion into the Lancet 'a call to arms' and it comes on the eve of a Nobel Laureates Symposium to be held in London to which the newspaper is a 'media partner'; surprise, surprise. It has been well known for years the the main stream media has been worshipping at the Temple of Albert but now The Thunderer is trying to drag me in with them. I won't come, I tell you.
Can you imagine the levels of nausea the Nobel Laureates Symposium could generate? Twenty three senile winners of gongs for literature, mathematics, economics, physiology etc discussing things they know nothing about. All being reported in glowing and totally non critical terms by a fawning press as 'fact', 'consensus', 'learned opinion' and on and on for ever.
A sad day. I thought the medical profession was smart enough to steer clear of all this but it looks as though, as a group, we have fallen. But rest assured that in a far flung corner of the Empire I'll stay true to commonsense.
Sir Starboard Genoa Sheet, you are a disgrace to our profession.
No comments:
Post a Comment