Heart Beat: "And always keep a hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse" - Hilaire Belloc
I wrote about Halloween some weeks past in what I thought was a non-controversial and reflective way. I did not feel that what I wrote could have given offence to anybody.
Apparently I was wrong. Mr Tom Beegan, the chief executive of the Health and Safety Authority (HSA) has taken issue with what I wrote. He pointed out that his organisation should not have the campaign to restrict bonfires attributed to it; rather it was the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that was responsible.
I, of course, accept his correction. I would point out, however, that whoever it was didn't seem to be very successful as the Dublin Fire Brigade received over twice as many calls to bonfires as in the previous year. Since there was such a plethora of environmentally undesirable events on the one night, does this mean we are all going to drop dead?
We're back to dioxins. Mr Beegan points out that the rules governing these compounds were as a result of an EC directive, following the serious accident at Seveso in Italy in 1976 in which four people died.
The deaths were due to a massive overdose of organo-chlorine compounds. The effects of poisons are, as I have written, dose related. I am not aware of anybody else in the world who has died as a result of exposure to these substances in the intervening 30 years.
True, there are skin conditions associated with over exposure, but the other dire predictions of cancer and death are tenuous in the extreme and do not bear scientific scrutiny.
It is worth noting that the other great dioxin scare was Love Canal near Niagara in the US, which led to drastic action from the US EPA. It effectively demolished the community, for fear of the leeching of these substances from the reclaimed land on which the township was built.
The National Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta, alarmed by this, compared this "afflicted" community with a broadly similar town remote from this site. This scientific double blind study found "that the illnesses afflicting the residents of Love Canal were not unusual, but were to be expected in a normal community of that size".
Where does that leave the dioxins we inhale and eat every day as part of our environment? There are real things to worry about in the world today.
Mr Beegan doesn't leave it there. Environmental and tobacco smoke, noise pollution and exposure to other chemicals are all dragged into this rather convoluted argument. We are told that workplace accidents and "incidents" cost the economy €3.4 billion a year. We are told that the "incidents" are caused in one way or another by factors of which, in his opinion, I apparently take a more relaxed view.
Yes, I am pretty relaxed and I hope to be able to get out of bed each morning and not be scared witless by the latest "threat" to my life and wellbeing. The point about me, "smiling benignly on those of us who must worry about the future" entertained me. I presume you did not write that with a straight face.
Our future lies in science and cold clear evaluation of problems, rather than in scares and half-baked generalisations. I haven't even mentioned radio masts, high voltage power lines, high pressure gas lines, nuclear waste, incineration, landfill, etc. I only wrote about having a bonfire, for God's sake.
While I am in the vicinity, however, I must refer to a piece in the Irish Medical News last month. It states that the Health Service Executive and the Health and Safety Authority are expected to launch a "health service audit tool and guidance document and corporate patient safety guide". What does that mean in plain English?
It further states that these authorities have been in contact regarding the HSE's policies on infection control. I refer them both to the New Testament; Luke 6:39: "And He spake a parable unto them. Can the blind lead the blind; shall they not both fall into the ditch?"
I have written extensively about the serious problem of MRSA infection, its causes, prevalence and consequences.
Accordingly, I was interested to hear our Minister for Health say that our infection rate is lower than our nearest neighbours. Not so long ago the same lady was telling us all that we were a disgrace and that all us doctors and nurses should wash our hands. Congratulations are obviously due on reducing what was such a serious threat merely a year ago. All this done by the application of soap and water, we have a latter day Semmelweiss indeed!
In reality though it remains a major problem when many of the hospitals have not, as yet, formed the infection-control teams necessary, due to lack of personnel and money. Dubious statistics like these may lead to complacency when there is no place for it. It is a serious professional business and requires experienced qualified staff to deal with it. Hospitals for many reasons are dangerous places. They always were and remain so today. They are no place for the unqualified, no matter how well intentioned.
Staff still struggle on in very poor conditions. They and the patients need help to bring about a modern service.
•Maurice Neligan is a cardiac surgeon.