MOSAIC: Time for a new Nobel Prize -DAWN Magazine; May 4, 2003

May 4, 2003

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)


MOSAIC: Time for a new Nobel Prize THE new buzzword ‘sustainable development’ is the simple idea of ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, now and for generations to come. However, sustainable development is not a new idea. The concept has been around for a number of decades. Many cultures over the course of human history have recognized the need for harmony between environment, society and economy. What is new is an articulation of these ideas in the context of a global industrial and information society. In 1987, the Brundtland Report, Our Common Future, which was submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations, introduced the concept of sustainable development: a global approach “that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. And now there’s talk of giving sustainable development the same status enjoyed by other subjects, sciences... The Nobel Prizes were, in 1901, the first international awards for achievements in physics, chemistry, medicine, literature and peace. In 1968 one addition was made: the ‘Prize in Economic Sciences in memory of Alfred Nobel’. Since then, nothing has changed. The world has undergone considerable changes since the 1960s. Concern about the darker side of mass consumption and the use of fossil fuels has grown since the Club of Rome published its reports on global environmental pollution in the early 1970s. By awarding them who show the leadership to really solve these problems, not the defeatism, but the innovation, the technological advances and responsibilities are set as an example. This spring, a letter was sent to the Nobel-foundation asking them to consider a Nobel Prize for Sustainable Development. Citizens, businesses, organizations and politicians all over the world are being invited to add their name to the letter on an Internet-site. — By Samina Iqbal No mobiles in hospitals MOBILE phones although being undeniably useful for many, are mostly banned in hospitals, because their use is considered hazardous in medical environments. This was stated in a recent issue of the British Medical Journal. This seems unjustified as there is no evidence for serious harm. A study conducted to prove this danger, could conclude that four per cent of medical devices suffered from electromagnetic interference from mobile phones at a distance of one metre. Other effects were on pacemakers, which caused oversensing or misinterpretation. This occurred only with the mobile phone being at a distance of 10 cm. The effect is removed when the mobile is taken away. These temporary and localized effects do not justify the outright ban on the use of mobile phones in hospitals. Some patients can suffer from isolation and find it difficult to contact relatives without a mobile phone. A patient with a permanent pacemaker is advised to use a mobile opposite to the site of implantation and to avoid placing the phone in the breast pocket. A similar practical solution could be found in hospitals too. Restrictions can be placed on use of mobile phones in the vicinity of monitoring devices and pacemakers. The ringing of the cell phone can be disturbing, especially in the consultation rooms. It is sensible to ask for the phones to be turned off before hand. A rational use of mobile phones in hospitals can be very helpful to most patients. — Dr Fatema Javad America ‘invades’ France WHAT punishment will America met out to France for not supporting its invasion of Iraq? While the world ponders over the consequences of the French decision, a Paris newspaper has let its imagination run wild and conjured up a US led invasion to topple President Jacques Chirac. The Monde, a satirical take-off on the popular daily Le Monde, recently hit the newsstands with tales of chaos amid a fictitious invasion that echoes the real war just waged in Iraq. “American, British and Monaco forces land in France,” the front-page headline screamed. “Chirac calls for resistance and disappears ... Pro-American uprising on Left Bank in Paris.” Among the 16 pages of reports are some on American troops seizing the Louvre museum, mistaking it for the nearby City Hall, while Kurds proclaim an autonomous state in eastern Paris. According to The Monde, President George W. Bush dubbed the operation “Big Spanking”, much to the delight of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, but Secretary of State Colin Powell blocked its use out of concern for world reaction. One report on an imagined post-invasion speech by Bush quotes him as saying the invasion’s aim was “to liberate France from the tiny, dirty naughty Chiraqi-Saddamistic crew”. At the invasion’s start, the paper depicts a groggy and unshaven Chirac delivering a rambling television address to the nation before fleeing to an underground tunnel. “It’s our duty to fiercely resist our American friends,” he says. CNN television, The Monde says, shows US troops marvelling at the luxury of Chirac’s Elysee Palace, much as the real troops gaped at Saddam’s palace in Baghdad. The Monde has Prime Minister Tony Blair being shot down by “friendly fire” as he returns to London in a Tornado fighter jet after participating in a bombing raid over Normandy. The allied command centre is located on the British Channel island of Jersey, led by a US general named Tommy Freaks. Not far from there, bombers mistake the famous medieval monastery of Mont Saint Michel for a radar station and damage it badly. The tiny principality of Monaco joins the assault and attacks the nearby French city of Nice in exchange for a United Nations Security Council “jumpseat” promised by Washington.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)