Let's move on to something we can do something about-like the carbs in the American diet.
There are a lot of players in the "us" in "let's move on." Dr. Davis is just one of them. The man is a cardiologist and his perspective seems to me to be that of a cardiologist. The is not a public health officer. He doesn't think like one. As a cardiologist, he is interested in cardiology patients--how to treat them and, to some extent and to his credit, how he might stop having so many of them. Sure, that latter bit has implications for public health, but that is not his focus nor can he have much impact on it. He's barely able to have impact on cardiology beyond his own practice.
As for public health policy, that would seem to be beyond the scope of this thread. It's beyond the scope of my imagination, which is extensive <g>. Cultures don't change on a dime, not to mention the practical problems of success like the environmental impact, the shortage of fish, and the hike in the cost of fish that has resulted from the message to eat more fish getting through to some small portion of the population. About the only thing we might do, public health-wise, without negative impact, culture-wise, is to get folks to eat less sugar. With success we will have postponed diabetes and heart disease for a few months to a few years for some portion of the population. That glass is not close to half full.
So, we have Dr Davis doing his individual-patient thing, the public health people wishing and flailing, and the costs in the commons running up. Seems to me that faulting Dr Davis for not taking on more is off base. |
