The art of addressing social problems varies in complexity depending on the interest of participants and the social state that is affected. In ‘The Lancet’ Peter Kandela, who is committed in addressing human rights particularly in health and medicine, he uses theoretical and physical evidence to criticize pollution parameters in Landon. Sketches from The Lancet addresses fundamental factors that pollute environment namely, motor vehicles and mechanical civilization that cause water, air, noise pollutions and of course annoyance in London streets. Peter on his task is fighting for the rights of the community, and he wants both sensitizations of the effects and giving directions to the authorities responsible for these messes. He fills some people should take full responsibility of controlling pollution, such as motor vehicle manufacturers and mechanical activities.
Most of these factors have critical effects on the environment, and they have been analyzed in different ways in different articles. Peter being one of the advocates, he has dwelled much on health effects without considering the economical side of them. Economical and safety aspects in the community they both conflict in terms of interest and what is important is how both of them should be harmonized in acceptable levels instead of skewing heavily on one side.
Noise and annoyance is one of the disturbing factors that has been addressed in London streets, vehicles, and other commercial activities are the vises that any city experience when it comes to noise pollution. These are daily activities that constitute town life, and the attention has been focused on only motor vehicles in this article. While it is uneconomical to work without these instruments, the author is not in order to attack strongly on such fundamental sector. ‘Noise civilization’ highlighted in the article has the magnitude of tolerance yet is one of the worst disturbance that cause annoyance compared with motor vehicles.
The manufacturers are of cause after quick profits and efficiency in terms of the purpose of the machine. The designers consider profits and preference of the users rather than considering side effects to the society. He is right by appealing to the motor engineers to design something better… however, it is ironical if there is the existence of concern authority that he should appeal to since the manufacturers have opposite interest to the environment. He may want to achieve complete eradication of the pollution in the city but without proper laid procedure and coordination it may not be realized. Rivers like the Thames in any city receives all kind of substance since all network of sewage is conveyed in the water either directly or indirectly and without proper care, it is a potential avenue of spreading diseases. His rhetorical ethos is that people believe in these waters, but for him the water from the Thames is unsafe… “Thames is an ideal source of water-supply, but it is a very grave indictment to say that the water at its best is diluted sewage.” It is realistic when measures are put in place and are compatible to hygienic requirements. From the journal Kandela appreciates the measures of disposal within the city, but there is a lack of commitment and matching of requirements.
All public enmities deserve both physical and mental peace and it is in order for the environment to be protected in all costs, when Peter protest on the use of mechanical drills around the hospital, what moves me is the kind of effect it has on the critical patients and those with heart problems. May be the voice was not had by the relevant authority since is an issue that was addressed earlier. However I find it misleading when the writer gives this issue with heavy concern, the kind of work being done around this hospital is not permanent. This is a state that happens once and has no effect on the lifetime of the facility. As much as it causes some disturbance, the road network is also important to a hospital and is a fact that the activity didn’t last. In addition Kandela on a response of practitioners getting hard time to use equipment is also a weak argument that should not count much on the presence of economical activity in the area.
Kandela arguments in this article are valid and most of them should be given concentration that they deserve, moreover he fails to give the best approach of solving each of the factors instead he provides solutions that are biased and weak to situations. Government authorities should be his front target since the government through its policies regulates the environmental factors in an organized way. It is through this government that will be the key player in harmonizing economical and safety parameters that results from commercial activities. Public awareness is fundamental and the call of protest should only upheld due to failure of government intervention like in the case of Secretary of the City of London Hospital where the authority did not respond on the letter concerning noise pollution. Pollution ” The Lancet” by Kandela is a guide that pointed out environmental hazards that London city believed they are there to stay, and I am happy the boldness he took to speak out.
Kandela, Peter. “Pollution.” The Lancet 353.9164 (1999): 1631.