Victims of past political persecution and unfair treatment by the judiciary are having their honor and credibility restored by the Act on Promoting Transitional Justice (促進轉型正義條例). Regrettably, the recently amended Air Pollution Control Act (空氣污染防制法) does not do the same for victims of air pollution, especially those who have lung cancer.
Since the WHO in 2013 announced that air pollution had been categorized as a Group 1 carcinogen and said that exposure to it causes lung cancer, air pollution prevention should not be allowed to ignore people with lung cancer caused by air pollution — such people should not be treated just as patients, but also as victims.
This is the way to comply with the spirit of the WHO’s 2016 campaign “BreatheLife: Clean Air. Healthy Future.”
In the campaign’s plan for action, the WHO charted out three major directions for its core purpose of “the integration of health equity, human rights, gender and social determinants”: First, promoting the analysis of categorized air pollution and health data, and increasing the oversight of health inequalities; second, incorporating it into the operations of the WHO; and third, providing national-level support — this is nothing less than a health version of the Act on Promoting Transitional Justice.
In a report last year, the WHO said that a horrifying proportion — 42 percent — of lung cancer deaths were attributable to exposure to air pollution, with 25 percent represented by ambient air pollution and 17 percent by household, or indoor, air pollution.
Being responsible for public health, the medical profession in Taiwan strongly urges the government to take the issue seriously.
Even if there is no party guilty for air pollution, there will always be victims, especially those who have lung cancer caused by air pollution. They are victims of this public hazard, and the government should take responsibility for providing them with care and treatment that is in line with national and social health justice.
The Ministry of Health and Welfare and the National Health Insurance Administration (NHIA) — the final guardians of public health — should be praised for taking the initiative by implementing the administration of lung cancer screening without waiting for the Environmental Protection Administration to take action.
The research into the correlation between air pollution and lung cancer conducted by the Taiwan Lung Cancer Society also deserves praise.
Such measures should be implemented from the perspective of the victims/patients who have lung cancer caused by air pollution, while the traditional way of evaluating economic benefits first when conducting research should be abandoned.
After all, research tends to be limited to targeting high-risk groups for lung cancer rather than those who have lung cancer attributable to air pollution — a group that the WHO describes as enjoying health equality, but suffering from hygiene inequality — or “the victims of air pollution” as they are called by medical circles in Taiwan.
“Victims of air pollution” should include those who have died, who are included in the lung cancer mortality rate as recorded by the ministry; lung cancer survivors, the rate of those who have been diagnosed with lung cancer by the NHIA; new cancer patients, the NHIA’s cancer incidence rate; air pollution sufferers who have not yet developed cancer, but whose health condition must be followed; air pollution sufferers who have not had any cancer screening, but should be followed up on; and the high-risk groups for lung cancer inflicted by air pollution.
Lee Wupo is president of Lee Wupo Clinic.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers