Jump to: Page Content, Section Navigation, Site Navigation, Site Search, Account Information, or Site Tools.
|
|
Association AffairsPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS:
Mary Ellen Avery |
|
CREDIT: IMAGE BANK |
All of these discoveries and approaches to solving human problems began with "imagining something different." And the issues society faces now will require comparable scientific imagination. By the year 2050-- within the lifetime of many in this audience --the human population is expected to grow from its current level of 6.3 billion to 8.9 billion. Will that increase be "good" or "bad"? I submit that it could be either. Poor outcomes could include pervasive poverty and its sequlae--hunger, deficiency diseases, armed conflicts, regional disparities in life span. Yet improved outcomes are also possible, depending on the extent to which we recognize and anticipate environmental change. "Good" will prevail if we acknowledge and anticipate the requirements implicit in such a population increase, and the expectation for a long and prosperous life. A long life-span depends on understanding how to maintain better health; that, in turn, requires a sustainable environment and access to health care. One example would be applying what is already known to benefit health: access to clean water, clean air, and appropriate nutrition, and ways to prevent epidemics and control the spread of infection, even in the absence of appropriate vaccines or antibiotics--such as what was so brilliantly executed in recent years in the experience with SARS.
Control of atmospheric pollution; proper disposal of nuclear waste; addressing inadequate food and water supplies: we all have our own list of needs for the future. High on my list right now is concern for the many thousands of children who are separated from parents by scourges such as ever-present war and the HIV pandemic. Every child needs to be wanted, to be assured of safety and love and education. We have known this truth for centuries, but ignored it all too often. I am appalled by the exploitation of children as soldiers; by brutalities such as amputations inflicted as punishment for child "offenders"; by the widespread use of land mines, which can grievously injure the curious child who asks, simply, "What is this?" In the United States, the largest industrial country, we see major regional differences in infant mortality (defined as deaths in the first year of life), with the differences skewed about 2.5 times toward nonwhite persons relative to white persons. The excess of nonwhite-infant deaths persists year after year. The Institute of Medicine recently distributed the findings of a study that highlighted the right to equal treatment and that set out a plan to end racial and ethnic disparities in clinical diagnosis and treatment in this country. Making that plan a reality will require that we mobilize the will and resources to do so.
Fortunately, the escalation in production of new knowledge promises a wonderful future in its application in solving human problems. We have recognized the horrors of war since the days of Homer. But over the same span, we have gone from a strictly oral means of sharing experiences, to inventions that potentially give every human on earth access to an incredible range of human experience, both from recorded history and from the daily news. Knowledge acquired by observation and experience is ours for the asking, through radio, video, e-mail, and satellite communications. And the availability of new knowledge has immense implications for our ability to teach and preach.
J. Robert Oppenheimer famously recalled that, as he watched the first controlled nuclear explosion at Alamogordo, New Mexico, he thought of words from the Hindu scripture, the Baghavad Gita: "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds." He understood that the bomb's creation raised the possibility of a global conflagration that could obliterate civilization itself. Yet that same recognition also spurred the meetings by concerned scientists to alert all of us to the dangers we face, the founding of the United Nations to promote a meeting place for resolution of conflict, and the support of efforts to help the children of the world through UNICEF, the United Nations Children's Fund.
I had the privilege of knowing and working with the late James Grant, the former head of UNICEF. His ability to make friends and suggest ways to lessen the burden of poverty in the nonindustrialized nations is legendary. He worked with dictators, presidents, and the press to highlight the desperate situation of many of the world's children. One example was his advocacy of oral-rehydration therapy to treat the dehydration caused by diarrhea, and the need for wells to provide clean water in the future. He communicated with the public by urging national leaders to be photographed with infants as they received oral hydration or immunization. Eradication of smallpox was a dream come true, and organizations such as UNICEF and Rotary International have been most helpful in financing these programs. Other organizations have enlisted the press to promote health practices, such as the highly successful "Back to Sleep" campaign in Australia to prevent sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) by providing public information on the appropriate sleeping position for infants.
And so I return, inevitably, to where I began this address--to the subject of children. That is not merely because of my own background as a neonatologist, but also because, in a larger sense, what is good for children is good for mankind. And the idea of children naturally plays into my other theme: the imagination's role in the power of science to transform our thinking about the world around us. Think back to your own childhood. You were almost certainly curious and imaginative yourself, or you would not be here tonight. That kind of imagination has played a significant part not only in the pursuit of new knowledge, but also, throughout the centuries, in mythology, literature, and scripture, and in storytelling even before the creation of written languages.
Mythical figures persist today--from gargoyles to dragons and even to wizards. In 1998, J. K. Rowling of Edinburgh published her first novel about the schoolboy Harry Potter and his adventures in a school for wizards. The series of Harry Potter books has since captivated individuals from 8 to 80 years of age--even those who know it is "make believe." If you want to speak to your seatmate in an airplane, just pull out your Harry Potter paperback book; the odds are great that the person next to you has read it, or at least a family member has. (I have the good fortune to know a distinguished Edinburgh neonatologist, Ian Laing, who was present at the birth of Ms. Rowling's infant, and I thought perhaps we could lure them to be principal speakers at this meeting. However, though Ms. Rowling thanked us for the invitation, she replied that she thought she should give her attention to her 6-month-old daughter--a reason no pediatrician could protest!) Howard Bennett of George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, D.C., has even, in a 30 October 2003 letter to the New England Journal of Medicine, described the appearance of a new childhood ailment--"Hogwarts headaches," caused, perhaps, by the sustained suspense and tension of young readers as they spend long periods enchanted and excited by these books. My 8-year-old grand-nephew, however, informs me that Harry Potter will surely be okay in the end, despite any danger, since "he is a true wizard."
CREDIT: JOE RAEDLE/NEWSMAKERS/GETTY IMAGES
And what has all of this to do with science? For an answer to that, I will rely once again on Albert Einstein--as quoted in an announcement for a recent exhibit on magic at the Museum of Science in Boston: "Underlying the seeming differences between science and magic are more similarities than you might imagine. Both disciplines rely on a process sparked by mystery and nurtured by curiosity." It is indeed a thrilling experience to create new knowledge.
References
Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)